Rebekah Thomas
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Rebekah Thomas has a total of 13 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Annette Verster
HIV/AIDS Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
1 shared publicationFlavia Bustreo
Assistant Director-General, Family, Women's and Children's Health, World Health Organization
1 shared publicationFrank Pega
Department of Public Health, Environmental and Social Determinants of Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
1 shared publication- Helen Jordan
Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
1 shared publication Lale Say
Reproductive Health and Research Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
1 shared publication- Ludovic Reveiz
Pan American Health Organization, Washington, D.C., United States of America
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 11 January 2025
- Published by Springer Nature in Journal of Public Health Policy
- Vol. 46 (1) , 193-210
An integrated framework to guide evidence-informed public health policymaking
Evidence-informed policymaking emphasizes that policy decisions should be informed by the best available evidence from research and follow a systematic and transparent approach. For public health policymaking we can learn from existing practices of transparent, evidence-informed decision-making for clinical practice, medicines, and medical technology. We review existing evidence-to-decision frameworks, as well as frameworks and theories for policymaking to address the political dimension of policymaking, and use this analysis to propose an integrated framework to guide evidence-informed policymaking. The framework includes nine decision-making criteria and allows for the addition of other context-specific criteria. It also emphasizes elements of the decision-making process that can give greater legitimacy, fairness, and transparency to the policy decision, such as the use of deliberative processes and assessment of conflicts of interest. We offer the framework as a tool to help government policy makers use evidence in a structured and transparent way when making decisions about public health policy options.
- 11 January 2025
- Published by Springer Nature in Journal of Public Health Policy
- Vol. 46 (1) , 193-210
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessAn integrated framework to guide evidence-informed public health policymaking
Evidence-informed policymaking emphasizes that policy decisions should be informed by the best available evidence from research and follow a systematic and transparent approach. For public health policymaking we can learn from existing practices of transparent, evidence-informed decision-making for clinical practice, medicines, and medical technology. We review existing evidence-to-decision frameworks, as well as frameworks and theories for policymaking to address the political dimension of policymaking, and use this analysis to propose an integrated framework to guide evidence-informed policymaking. The framework includes nine decision-making criteria and allows for the addition of other context-specific criteria. It also emphasizes elements of the decision-making process that can give greater legitimacy, fairness, and transparency to the policy decision, such as the use of deliberative processes and assessment of conflicts of interest. We offer the framework as a tool to help government policy makers use evidence in a structured and transparent way when making decisions about public health policy options.
- Open Access
- 1 February 2017
- Published by WHO Press in Bulletin of the World Health Organization
- Vol. 95 (2) , 154-156
Ensuring an inclusive global health agenda for transgender people
- 1 February 2017
- Published by WHO Press in Bulletin of the World Health Organization
- Vol. 95 (2) , 154-156
Open AccessEnsuring an inclusive global health agenda for transgender people
- 1 December 2015
- Vol. 17 (2) , 11-20
Assessing the Impact of a Human Rights-Based Approach across a Spectrum of Change for Women's, Children's, and Adolescents' Health
Global momentum around women's, children's, and adolescents' health, coupled with the ambitious and equalizing agenda of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), has exposed a tension between the need for comprehensive, multi-actor, rights-based approaches that seek to "close the gaps" and a growing economic and political imperative to demonstrate efficiency, effectiveness, and returns on specific investments. To address this challenge, this paper proposes a framework to measure "results" in a way that offers a more nuanced understanding of the impact of human rights-based approaches and their complexity, as well as their contextual, multi-sectoral, and evolving nature. We argue that the impact of human rights-based approaches is best measured across a spectrum of change-at the individual, programmatic, structural, and societal levels. Such an analysis would allow for more accurate assessments of the cumulative effect of these changes. The paper also underscores the long-overdue need to better define the parameters of a human rights-based approach to health. This is an important part of the research agenda on human rights and health in the context of the SDGs and the Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and Adolescents' Health, and amid calls for better measurement and greater accountability for resources, results, and rights at all levels. While this paper focuses on women's, children's, and adolescents' health, the proposed framework can apply as readily to other areas of health and provides a new frame of reference for assessing the impact of human rights-based approaches.
- 1 December 2015
- Vol. 17 (2) , 11-20
Assessing the Impact of a Human Rights-Based Approach across a Spectrum of Change for Women's, Children's, and Adolescents' Health
Global momentum around women's, children's, and adolescents' health, coupled with the ambitious and equalizing agenda of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), has exposed a tension between the need for comprehensive, multi-actor, rights-based approaches that seek to "close the gaps" and a growing economic and political imperative to demonstrate efficiency, effectiveness, and returns on specific investments. To address this challenge, this paper proposes a framework to measure "results" in a way that offers a more nuanced understanding of the impact of human rights-based approaches and their complexity, as well as their contextual, multi-sectoral, and evolving nature. We argue that the impact of human rights-based approaches is best measured across a spectrum of change-at the individual, programmatic, structural, and societal levels. Such an analysis would allow for more accurate assessments of the cumulative effect of these changes. The paper also underscores the long-overdue need to better define the parameters of a human rights-based approach to health. This is an important part of the research agenda on human rights and health in the context of the SDGs and the Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and Adolescents' Health, and amid calls for better measurement and greater accountability for resources, results, and rights at all levels. While this paper focuses on women's, children's, and adolescents' health, the proposed framework can apply as readily to other areas of health and provides a new frame of reference for assessing the impact of human rights-based approaches.