{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020246478873239437, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007922535211267605, 'mean_word_length': 5.080213903743315, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
You can't get there from here: building bridges across research and practice communities.

IN THIS ISSUE, Ried and Fuller (page 6) describe an approach taken by the Primary Health Care Research Evaluation and Development (PHCRED) program in South Australia to support novice authors. This paper reminds us of the acute need to support developing researchers, given the low levels of support for health services research in Australia.1 But where is the accompanying paper that focuses our attention on developing the research insight of managers, leaders, policymakers and practitioners? There has been much talk of the critical need to link the disparate research and decision-making communities, but little action. Consistently we find evidence that evidence is not available or is not used. In a study of economic evaluations only 27% were thought to have influenced either health care decision makers or policy.2 Review of purchasing decisions by NHS districts found that only 42% had evidence to support the decision made.3 In Australia there is a dearth of health services research focusing on major system or broad policy issues.1