Background: Conceptualisations of what it means to use evidence in policymaking often appear divided between two extremes. On the one side are works presenting it as the implementation of research findings – particularly evaluations of intervention effect. In contrast stand theoretically informed works exploring the multiple meanings of evidence use, political complexities, and the constructed nature of research evidence itself. The first perspective has been criticised as over-simplistic, while the latter can make it difficult to answer questions of what might be good, or improved, uses of evidence in policymaking. Methods: To further debate, this paper develops a ‘programmatic approach’ to evidence use, drawing on theories of institutional decision making and empirical work on evidence use within 11 National Malaria Control Programmes in Africa. We apply the programmatic approach by investigating the key goals and tasks of programme officials, recognising that these will shape the routines and logics followed affecting evidence utilisation. We then map out the forms, sources, features, and applications of evidence that serve programme officials in their goals. Findings: In the case of malaria programmes, evidence use was understood in relation to tasks including: advocacy for funding, budget allocation, regulation development, national planning, and identification of information gaps – all of which might require different evidence sources, forms, and applications. Discussion and Conclusions: Ultimately the programmatic approach aims to facilitate clearer understanding of what uses of evidence are appropriate to policymakers, while also allowing critical reflection on whether such uses are ‘good’ from both programme and broader social perspectives.

中文翻译：

---

从项目角度理解证据使用：国家疟疾控制项目的概念发展和实证见解

背景：关于在政策制定中使用证据意味着什么的概念化常常出现在两个极端之间。一方面是作品将其作为研究结果的实施——尤其是对干预效果的评估。相比之下，站在理论基础上的作品探索了证据使用、政治复杂性和研究证据本身的构建性质的多重含义。第一种观点被批评为过于简单化，而后一种观点可能会让人难以回答在政策制定中什么可能是好的或改进的证据使用的问题。方法：为了进一步辩论，本文利用机构决策理论和非洲 11 个国家疟疾控制计划中证据使用的实证工作，制定了证据使用的“程序化方法”。我们通过调查项目官员的关键目标和任务来应用项目方法，认识到这些将影响影响证据利用的常规和逻辑。然后，我们绘制出为项目官员实现其目标服务的证据的形式、来源、特征和应用。结果：就疟疾项目而言，证据使用被理解为与以下任务相关的任务：资金倡导、预算分配、法规制定、国家规划和信息差距的识别——所有这些可能需要不同的证据来源、形式和应用程序。讨论和结论：最终，程序化方法旨在促进更清楚地了解哪些证据的使用适合政策制定者，