An illustrative guide to a Policy Lab model: contributing to evidence-informed policies for digital technology in youth mental health care
Rattachement africain : au, us, ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Objective This article provides researchers with an illustrative guide for a workshop model that facilitates evidence-informed policy. The Policy Lab model supports collaboration between experts and policymakers; in the example provided, participants considered digital technologies with near-term potential to improve youth mental health care. Method The Policy Lab model uses structured workshop activities to explore a policy question, before narrowing the focus on potential answers. The barriers, enablers, and implementation mechanisms of potential policies are then considered. From this data policy proposal(s) are drafted, reviewed, and reported. Results Through the Policy Lab activities, participants identified two priority technologies and generated data to inform the formulation of two policies. The policies were focused on (1) using artificial intelligence to improve the personalisation and precision of youth mental health care and (2) the expanded use of integrated data to improve youth mental health service quality. Conclusions Evidence-informed policy is a collaborative process. To potentially influence policy requires timely engagement with policymakers and an understanding of the policy context. Researchers considering using the model are encouraged to include a range of expertise.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- An illustrative guide to a Policy Lab model: contributing to evidence-informed policies for digital technology in youth mental health care
- Date Crossref
- 30/01/2025
- Éditeur
- CSIRO Publishing
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.