The Health policy analysis .For assignment help click here
1. The Health policy analysis Summarize the evidence (1 to 3 paragraphs). Summarize what you found out about whether this policy leads to the health outcome desired. Do we have the evidence we need to establish that? How good is it? Give a brief summary of what evidence we have for this policy solution. Draw on expertise gained in the evidence courses to search for, identify, and evaluate evidence that addresses what we know about what might resolve this problem. (This analysis is not in the Milstead and Knestrick article.)
A. Your summary must include evidence for both clinical (individual level) and policy-related (population level) effectiveness. There is a presentation in the module about this distinction. Let’s use as an example reimbursement for a procedure. Here, there are at least three different areas of evidence.
i. Is there evidence that the procedure itself leads to better health outcomes (clinical evidence)?
ii. Is there evidence that the policy leads more appropriate use of the procedure (more utilization, which is policy evidence)?
iii. Or, even better, can you establish that the policy leads to better health outcomes (policy evidence)?
iv. There is a narrated slide show in the module to help you distinguish between clinical and policy related evidence. If you feel you may not have included both in your paper, consult that slide show, post a question in the course discussion, come to a webinar, or write or call your faculty. This is an important part of the paper and accounts for substantial points in the rubric.
B. Search for information about evidence from scholarly sources:
i. You need use only the Community Guide for Preventive Services (http://www.thecommunityguide.org (Links to an external site.)), Medline, CINAHL, and PsycInfo.
ii. If you find a good systematic review of interventions, you do not need to go earlier than its date in Medline, CINAHL, and PsycInfo.
iii. You may have to go back to around the time the problem was identified, or around the time the policy was developed. Once you find the classic articles, use their keywords to find any useful updates.
C. Summarize your findings in terms of what we know about effective interventions for this problem.
i. Do not summarize each individual study, just the areas of intervention for which evidence exists.
ii. Be sure to include whatever evidence you find for the policy response you are examining in your paper, even if that is that there is none. If you do not comment on evidence for the policy, you will earn an rating for that criterion in the rubric. There is a slide presentation in the Policymodule on evidence, explaining the importance commenting on both clinical evidence and evidence for the policy itself. Questions about what kind of evidence is needed for your policy are good ones to bring to webinars, meetings with faculty, or course discussion postings.
iii. If you do not find the kind of evidence you need, look for something similar. For example, perhaps you cannot find evidence of whether reimbursement for a particular procedure leads to more appropriate utilization of that procedure or better health outcomes in an insured population. Then look for evidence of whether reimbursement of other procedures led to those outcomes.
iv. Be sure to comment on the nature of the evidence you have found, particularly if you find only recommendations, or minimal research evidence to support the policy. Draw on what you learned in the course on evidence based practice, distinguishing between weak and strong evidence and commenting on what you find.
2. Conclude (1 paragraph). Give your opinion on whether this policy issue has been successfully resolved or not.
A. Explain your rationale.
B. Include whether evidence supports the policy process to date.
C. Include what steps you think most useful for the future.
3. Complete self-editing checklist(The Health policy analysis }
