The \"Letter to the Editor\" titled \"Scalp incision technique for decompressive hemicraniectomy: comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of the reverse question mark versus alternative retroauricular and Kempe incision techniques of published cases\" provides a detailed analysis of different scalp incision techniques in decompressive hemicraniectomy procedures. While commendable for its systematic approach and valuable insights, the letter has several limitations, including a lack of transparency in the search strategy, failure to address potential sources of bias, and a narrow focus on technical aspects without considering broader outcome domains and practical considerations. Despite these limitations, the letter underscores the importance of evidence-based decision-making in neurosurgical practice and calls for further research to address these gaps.

People often rely on scientific findings to help them make decisions-however, failing to report effect magnitudes might lead to a potential bias in assuming findings are practically significant. Across two online studies (Prolific; N = 800), we measured U.S. adults\' endorsements of expensive interventions described in media reports that led to effects that were small, large, or of unreported magnitude between groups. Participants who viewed interventions with unreported effect magnitudes were more likely to endorse interventions compared with those who viewed interventions with small effects and were just as likely to endorse interventions as those who viewed interventions with large effects, suggesting a practical significance bias. When effect magnitudes were reported, participants on average adjusted their evaluations accordingly. However, some individuals, such as those with low numeracy skills, were more likely than others to act on small effects, even when explicitly prompted to first consider the meaningfulness of the effect.

Increasing opportunities for prevention of infectious diseases by new, effective vaccines and the expansion of global immunization programs across the life course highlight the importance and value of evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) by National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs). The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Task Force for Global Health (TFGH) have developed and made available new tools to support NITAGs in EIDM. These include a toolkit for conducting facilitated training of NITAGs, Secretariats, or work groups on the use of the Evidence to Recommendations (EtR) approach to advise Ministries of Health (MoH) on specific vaccine policies, and an eLearning module on the EtR approach for NITAG members, Secretariat and others. The CDC and TFGH have also supported final development and implementation of the NITAG Maturity Assessment Tool (NMAT) for assessing maturity of NITAG capabilities in seven functional domains. The EtR toolkit and eLearning have been widely promoted in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) Headquarters and Regional Offices through workshops engaging over 30 countries to date, and the NMAT assessment tool used in most countries in 3 WHO regions (Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, African). Important lessons have been learned regarding planning and conducting trainings for multiple countries and additional ways to support countries in applying the EtR approach to complete vaccine recommendations. Priorities for future work include the need to evaluate the impact of EtR training and NMAT assessments, working with partners to expand and adapt these tools for wider use, synergizing with other approaches for NITAG strengthening, and developing the best approaches to empower NITAGs to use the EtR approach.

BACKGROUND: Investigating low-prevalence diseases such as multiple sclerosis is challenging because of the rather small number of individuals affected by this disease and the scattering of real-world data across numerous data sources. These obstacles impair data integration, standardization, and analysis, which negatively impact the generation of significant meaningful clinical evidence.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to present a comprehensive, research question-agnostic, multistakeholder-driven end-to-end data analysis pipeline that accommodates 3 prevalent data-sharing streams: individual data sharing, core data set sharing, and federated model sharing.
METHODS: A demand-driven methodology is employed for standardization, followed by 3 streams of data acquisition, a data quality enhancement process, a data integration procedure, and a concluding analysis stage to fulfill real-world data-sharing requirements. This pipeline\'s effectiveness was demonstrated through its successful implementation in the COVID-19 and multiple sclerosis global data sharing initiative.
RESULTS: The global data sharing initiative yielded multiple scientific publications and provided extensive worldwide guidance for the community with multiple sclerosis. The pipeline facilitated gathering pertinent data from various sources, accommodating distinct sharing streams and assimilating them into a unified data set for subsequent statistical analysis or secure data examination. This pipeline contributed to the assembly of the largest data set of people with multiple sclerosis infected with COVID-19.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed data analysis pipeline exemplifies the potential of global stakeholder collaboration and underlines the significance of evidence-based decision-making. It serves as a paradigm for how data sharing initiatives can propel advancements in health care, emphasizing its adaptability and capacity to address diverse research inquiries.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based decision-making is a foundation of health information systems; however, routine health information is not mostly utilized by decision makers in the Amhara region. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the facility and department heads\' perceptions towards the demand for and use of routine health information for decision making.
METHODS: A phenomenological qualitative study was done in eight districts of the Amhara region from June 10/2019 to July 30/2019. We obtained written informed consent and recruited 22 key informants purposively. The research team prepared a codebook, assigned codes to ideas, identified salient patterns, grouped similar ideas, and developed themes from the data. Thus, data were analyzed thematically using OpenCode software.
RESULTS: The study revealed that health workers collected many data, but little was demanded and utilized to inform decisions. The majority of respondents perceived that data were collected merely for reporting. Lack of skills in data management, analysis, interpretation, and use were the technical attributes. Individual attributes included low staff motivation, carelessness, and lack of value for data. Poor access to data, low support for Health Information System, limited space for archiving, and inadequate finance were related to organizational attributes. The contextual (social-political) factors also influenced the use of eHealth applications for improved data demand and use among health care providers.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, health workers collect routine health data merely for reporting, and they did not demand and use it mostly to inform decisions and solve problems. Technical, individual, organizational, and contextual attributes were contributors to low demand and use of routine health data. Thus, we recommend building the technical capacity of health workers, introducing motivation mechanisms and ensuring accountability systems for better data use.

UNASSIGNED: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a rapid surge of literature on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and the wider impacts of the pandemic. Research on COVID-19 has been produced at an unprecedented rate, and the ability to stay on top of the most relevant evidence is top priority for clinicians, researchers, public health professionals and policymakers. This article presents a knowledge synthesis methodology developed and used by the Public Health Agency of Canada for managing and maintaining a literature surveillance system to identify, characterize, categorize and disseminate COVID-19 evidence daily.
UNASSIGNED: The Daily Scan of COVID-19 Literature project comprised a systematic process involving four main steps: literature search; screening for relevance; classification and summarization of studies; and disseminating a daily report.
UNASSIGNED: As of the end of March 2022 there were approximately 300,000 COVID-19 and pandemic-related citations in the COVID-19 database, of which 50%-60% were primary research. Each day, a report of all new COVID-19 citations, literature highlights and a link to the updated database was generated and sent to a mailing list of over 200 recipients including federal, provincial and local public health agencies and academic institutions.
UNASSIGNED: This central repository of COVID-19 literature was maintained in real time to aid in accelerated evidence synthesis activities and support evidence-based decision-making during the pandemic response in Canada. This systematic process can be applied to future rapidly evolving public health topics that require the continuous evaluation and dissemination of evidence.

National Immunization Technical Advisory Committees (NITAGs) are tasked with the responsibility of guiding ministries of health and national immunization programmes in their policy development processes. Many NITAGs rely on evidence reviewed by the World Health Organization\'s (WHO) Strategic Group of Experts(SAGE) on immunization and aim to adapt WHO\'s recommendations to their respective contexts. This relationship took on exceptional importance since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which NITAGs have expressed a notable struggle to craft appropriate policies on population prioritization and vaccine utilization in the face of supply constraints and complex programmatic and delivery logistics. This online survey was conducted to assess the usefulness of the SAGE guidance documents for COVID-19 vaccine policies and to examine the persisting needs and challenges facing NITAGs. Results confirmed that SAGE recommendations concerning COVID-19 vaccines are easy to access, understand, and adapt. They have been found to be comprehensive and timely under the data and time constrained circumstances confronting SAGE. The Global NITAG Network (GNN) appears to be the most popular vehicle for addressing questions among high income countries, in contrast to lower income countries who favour WHO Country or Regional Offices. NITAGs place much value on interaction with other NITAGs, which requires facilitation and could benefit from increased opportunities, especially within regions. It is further noted that some NITAGs have had to tackle issues during the pandemic not typically considered by SAGE, such as supply chain logistics and vaccine demand. Learning from the COVID-19 experience offers opportunities to strengthen NITAGs and the pandemic recovery effort through the development of more concrete procedures and consideration of more varied types of data, including implementation effectiveness and uptake data. There is also an opportunity for an increasing involvement of Country Office WHO personnel to support NITAGs, while ensuring information and evidence needs of countries are adequately reflected in SAGE deliberations.

BACKGROUND: Train-the-trainer concepts (TTT concepts) to impart evidence-based practice competences aim at promoting the implementation of evidence-based practice. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot-test a TTT training program for teachers at schools for health care professionals. The program is based on the core curriculum \"Evidence-based Decision-making\" set up by the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine e.V. (DNEbM).
METHODS: The study was conducted according to the UKMRC framework for complex interventions and consisted of Phase 1 (Development) and Phase 2 (Piloting). In Phase 1, the intervention was modelled on the basis of a systematic literature search. In Phase 2, the TTT concept was piloted with teachers at two schools for health care professionals. For the evaluation, short interviews with the participants were carried out after each module; classroom observations took place during the training and were followed by a focus group interview. In addition, baseline characteristics were collected prior to the training and descriptively evaluated. Critical health competence was surveyed using the Critical Health Competence Test (CHC test) before and after the course. The questionnaires, interviews and classroom observation protocols were processed according to Mayring\'s qualitative content analysis. Person parameters ±SD were calculated to determine the level of competence.
RESULTS: Piloting took place in September 2018 and from September to November 2019. Eight teachers from two training institutions participated. The evaluation of the focus group interviews and the classroom observation protocols resulted in a category system comprising 6 main and 17 subcategories. The feasibility of the materials and methods could be demonstrated in both pilot tests. Reactivation and extension of prior knowledge were confirmed by the participants. The small group size was appreciated; the participants took an active part during the lessons and were stimulated to plan their own lessons. The evaluation of the CHC test revealed average person parameters of 432 ± 45 (pretest, n=8) and 512 ± 65 (posttest, n=8).
CONCLUSIONS: Using mixed methods, the results show the feasibility of the curriculum.
CONCLUSIONS: Further evaluation in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to prove the efficacy of the curriculum.

The academic health department (AHD) is a partnership between an academic institution and a governmental health agency. These partnerships are meant to provide mutual benefits that include opportunities for student field placements and internships, practice-informed curriculum, and practice-based research. The term academic health department dates back only to 2000, although there are several examples of academic-practice partnerships prior to that date. In addition to AHDs that have been established over the past two decades, other forms of academic-practice engagement provide similar mutual benefits, such as prevention research centers and public health training centers. Current research on AHDs explores how these partnerships matter regarding the outputs, outcomes, and impacts of the units that comprise them. This review also considers the most recent perspectives on how AHDs have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic and how they might advance public health\'s efforts to address structural racism and promote health equity.

To promote the institutionalization of the health technology assessment(HTA) mechanism in various countries, World Health Organization(WHO) has published the Institutionalizing Health Technology Assessment Mechanisms: a How to Guide to introduce five steps of institutionalizing the HTA mechanism systematically, specifically, "establishing a mandate; establishing the legal framework; reviewing or establishing the legal framework; establishing institutional and governance arrangements; processes and evidence required for assessment and appraisal; and monitoring and evaluation". Traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) HTA can provide scientific information and decision-making evidence for decision-makers at all levels to select TCM health technology reasonably, and promote the high-quality development of the TCM healthcare system. However, TCM HTA is in its infancy, and it is imperative to carry out relevant work under the guidance of global standard documents to ensure standardization, transparency, and fairness. In light of the WHO guidance, this research group put forward the necessity and logical framework for the institutionalizing HTA mechanism of TCM, which is helpful to establish the institutionalizing HTA mechanism in line with national conditions and suitable for TCM, provide scientific guidance for the research of TCM HTA, and contribute to TCM healthcare decision-making.