International journal of public health · 2026
From evidence to action: expert perspectives on stakeholder dialogues in Swiss health policy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rubinelli Sara, Mesa-Vieira Cristina, Peytremann-Bridevaux Isabelle, Diviani Nicola, Mantwill Sarah, Messerli Natalie Gray, Fiordelli Maddalena
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Stakeholder dialogues are increasingly used to link research evidence with policy and practice in health systems. Yet little is known about the practical reasoning behind their design, conduct, and use. This study investigated how researchers and public-health professionals conceptualise and operationalise stakeholder dialogues, with a primary focus on Switzerland's federal, multilingual health system and broader relevance to other settings.
METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with fourteen experts involved in designing, facilitating, or implementing stakeholder dialogues in Switzerland and internationally. Interview data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Stakeholder dialogues emerged as structured, evidence-informed discussions linking research to implementation. Success depended on high-quality evidence briefs, skilled neutral facilitation, and inclusive formats enabling equal participation. Consensus was not required; clarified disagreement and transparent reasoning were legitimate outcomes. Impact ranged from mutual learning to policy uptake, shaped by federalism and linguistic diversity.
CONCLUSION: Stakeholder dialogues function as boundary infrastructures that integrate evidence, experience, and values. When deliberately designed, they enhance the quality of reasoning, trust, and coordination, transforming evidence use from a technical exercise into a relational practice in health policymaking.
METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with fourteen experts involved in designing, facilitating, or implementing stakeholder dialogues in Switzerland and internationally. Interview data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Stakeholder dialogues emerged as structured, evidence-informed discussions linking research to implementation. Success depended on high-quality evidence briefs, skilled neutral facilitation, and inclusive formats enabling equal participation. Consensus was not required; clarified disagreement and transparent reasoning were legitimate outcomes. Impact ranged from mutual learning to policy uptake, shaped by federalism and linguistic diversity.
CONCLUSION: Stakeholder dialogues function as boundary infrastructures that integrate evidence, experience, and values. When deliberately designed, they enhance the quality of reasoning, trust, and coordination, transforming evidence use from a technical exercise into a relational practice in health policymaking.