CHOOSE YOUR SITUATION

Back to customer servicesPolicy departments and public health organizations

Two policy options: how do effects, resources and coverage compare?

A regional pilot needs a case for effects, coverage barriers, resources and equity before approval discussions.

How does this scope address your concerns?

An apparently sensible option may not fit local capacity, while evidence, assumptions and expert views are mixed together.

When this scope fits

1 regional question, 2 defined options, available aggregate materials and an agreed discussion process.

When the scope needs adjusting

Guaranteed policy approval or treating observational associations as proof that an intervention works.

REAL SOURCES · ILLUSTRATIVE REQUEST · DOWNLOADABLE SAMPLE

Older-person discharge support: calls versus home transitions

Download sample packZIP

Implementation matrix for two options

01Contact

A calls: reachable contacts; B visits: transport and access

02Community capacity

A follow-up staff; B visit schedules and referrals

03Equity

Check hearing, living alone, rural reach and language barriers

Illustrative policy comparison structure. The WHO framework does not prove either option more effective or equitable.

Check	Finding / sample content	Use
Effect sources	Different service components need separate checks	List original studies and applicable populations
Resource assumptions	Local schedules and travel costs are missing	Assign data owners and fields
Pilot evaluation	Excluded groups require active recording	Agree collection through two expert discussions

SOURCES USED IN THIS EXAMPLE

Prepared 5 Oct 2026 · Selected references, not an exhaustive systematic search

Scope & acceptance

Work covered by the quote

Illustrative scope: 1 regional policy question, 2 options, agreed local aggregate materials, implementation and equity assessment, and 2 expert-discussion rounds.

Pilot references: CNY 200,000–500,000 for a topic; integrated projects CNY 500,000–2,000,000 or more. Fictional CNY 500,000 budget: 200,000 question and evidence, 200,000 local data, implementation conditions and equity assessment, 100,000 discussions and report; payments of 150,000/200,000/150,000. Fieldwork, external data and additional experts are listed separately.

Acceptance criteria

Evidence and assumptions behind each option can be reviewed separately, including how insufficient evidence should be addressed.

Checking the evidence

Volumes come from the current proposed pilot scope. The budget and scenario are illustrative, not a completed client project or real transaction. A formal quote follows confirmation of scope, data permissions and personnel.
Inputs to confirm: proposed policy options and versions, coverage region, official documents applicable at the time and authorized local aggregate data. Research and expert opinions retain separate sources and dates.

Workflow and inputs

From inputs to delivery

Explore the workflow and deliverable structure. This preview does not run searches, read real records or produce medical findings.

01 / WORKFLOW PREVIEW

Define the task

Define region, population, 2 options and decision use; list existing aggregate materials.

Methods, sources and professional responsibilities

THE BASIS FOR THIS SCOPE

Why this approach? Inspect the basis.

Institutional decisions require effect evidence, resources, implementation conditions and local applicability.

OFFICIAL GUIDANCE

WHO Guidelines

World Health Organization

Inspect public-health and clinical guidance

Find WHO guidelines and review the recommendation questions, evidence base and intended settings.

Scope & access conditions

Global guidance is not evidence of local implementation outcomes. Check population, resources, policy and timing.

Open official source

PUBLIC DATABASE

Cochrane

Read systematic reviews and plain-language summaries

Explore a question’s research synthesis and the confidence researchers have in the findings.

Scope & access conditions

Plain-language summaries are public; full-review access varies. Applicability still depends on the population and question.

Open official source

METHOD REFERENCE

GRADE · Cochrane Handbook

Cochrane · Chapter 14

Show effect size and confidence separately

Present important outcomes, relative and absolute effects, available data and certainty, with reasons for downgrading.

Scope & access conditions

GRADE evaluates a body of evidence for a particular outcome. Database inclusion or one study does not automatically establish high certainty.

Open official source

These references support problem definition and evidence appraisal. Your conclusions still require project-specific sources and professional review.

The value of this commissionEOS combines regional inputs, resource/equity conditions and evidence gaps into one decision table and pilot plan.

Policy question and option comparisonCompare alternatives and value

Two policy options have advocates. How can discussion return to evidence and implementation conditions?

What to assess	Cochrane Response	Evidence OS · Commissioned scope
Service focus	Cochrane Response offers commissioned policy synthesis and international methods expertise.	EOS combines regional inputs, resource/equity conditions and evidence gaps into one decision table and pilot plan.
When to choose	It is a direct benchmark for rigorous synthesis and broad international methods support.	Example: one regional question, two options, two expert rounds and a disagreement register.

What the fee pays for: Planning reference: CNY 200,000–500,000 for a topic or CNY 500,000–2,000,000+ for a programme; field evaluation is separate.
Value beyond this task: Sources, assumptions and pilot indicators become reusable appraisal assets.
How to assess value: Measure option-evidence coverage, resolved questions and repeated-preparation hours; policy adoption is not acceptance.

Check local-data quality, conflicts and expert scope; association does not establish intervention effectiveness.

CHECK THE OFFICIAL SERVICE SCOPECochrane Response · Custom evidence synthesis

Reuse and updates after delivery

Measures, sources and disagreement records can inform a pilot plan and later evaluation. Applicability is checked again before expanding regions.

Agree reuse rights, retention and export periods, and future update fees when scoping.

Questions before commissioning

Does the social connection and surgical outcomes study prove that a support service will work?

No. It provides an association-evidence base. Service effectiveness still requires appropriate research and local evaluation.

Does the budget include field implementation and surveys?

Not automatically. Fieldwork, pilot execution and external costs are itemized and agreed first.

Can I buy this online now?

Email us your scoping request at no charge. We’ll reply as soon as possible to confirm scope and prepare a quote. Services, professionals, contracts and payment are confirmed separately. This form does not accept medical-record attachments or sensitive images.

Define the delivery for your actual question.

Add your goal, available inputs and timing. Agree scope, review responsibilities and a quote before commissioning.

Request scope & quote

Explore other situations

Policy departments and public health organizations

The same topics recur all year. How can evidence and meeting materials carry forward?

Quarterly change briefs, meeting question materials, professional-time records and an annual gap report. Scans finding no change still state their coverage.

CNY 300,000–1,000,000+ per yearSee the deliverable

Other tasks in this area

Coverage value and budget assessment Guideline question updates and monitoring