Testing Strategies to Improve Substance Misuse Prevention Research Use in State Policy Contexts
Ориентир для пациента и семьи
Простыми словами
Автоматическая сводка по структурированным данным реестра. Она помогает сориентироваться, но не заменяет официальный протокол или оценку врача.
- Что изучают
- В протоколе указаны: Intervention: RPC Group, Active Comparator: Control Group.
- Кому может быть актуально
- Состояния в реестре: Substance Abuse, Substance Use Disorders, Prevention, Legislation. Базовые параметры: Без ограничений · Все.
- Что важно проверить
- Возраст, диагноз и пол — только базовые ориентиры. Предыдущее лечение, анализы и другие обязательные условия указаны ниже в критериях участия.
- Где проводится
- США
- Следующий шаг
- Сохраните исследование, покажите его лечащему врачу и уточните актуальный статус у исследовательского центра. Расходы, документы и поездка →
Не всё понятно в терминах? Прочитайте наш гид для пациентов →
Официальное название
Building the Science of Evidence-Informed Prevention Policy: a Multi-level Model for Supporting Substance Misuse Prevention
Обзор
If science is to inform effective substance misuse prevention policy and ultimately improve public health, the field needs an effective strategy for directly supporting policymakers' use of research evidence, yet our field lacks an evidence-based model designed for this purpose. Accordingly, a state-level randomized controlled trial (N = 30 states) of a formal, theory-based approach for appropriately supporting policymakers' use of scientific evidence--known as the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model is proposed. This work has the potential to reduce population-level substance misuse by improving the use of scientific information in policymaking, thus increasing the availability of evidence-based prevention programs and policies.
Подробное описание
If science is to inform policy and ultimately improve public health, the field needs an effective strategy for directly supporting policymakers' use of research evidence. However, the field lacks an evidence-based model designed for supporting state policymakers' use of prevention research in crafting legislation. Instead, the field continues to largely rely on ad hoc strategies for translating prevention research (e.g., opportunistic outreach and responding to policymakers' requests if or when they are made). Accordingly, an experimental study of a formal, theory-based approach for supporting policymakers' use of scientific evidence that does not involve lobbying-the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model is proposed. The RPC fosters productive engagement between the policy and research communities by implementing systematic capacity building and outreach strategies. Previous experimental work on the RPC demonstrated the ability of this model to increase engagement between researchers and policymakers, increase policymakers' value for research evidence, and improve their use of scientific evidence in their policymaking.1 The study proposes a state-level randomized controlled trial of the RPC (N = 30 state legislatures) that will evaluate the model's ability to improve engagement between state policymakers' and the prevention science community, build policymakers' awareness and value of substance misuse prevention research, and subsequently their use of research evidence throughout the policymaking process. To accomplish this, the study will test three specific research aims. Aim 1 will assess historical and current use of research evidence in state legislation pertaining to substance misuse prevention. This will involve qualitative coding of bills introduced by state legislatures over the last five years. Aim 2 will compare the frequency and quality of engagement with prevention researchers between the intervention and control conditions. Additionally, the study will assess how the RPC model influences policymakers' value and awareness of substance misuse prevention over time using a validated survey across three time points. Aim 3 will evaluate the effectiveness of the RPC on legislators' actual use of research in legislation by observing and quantifying changes in legislator behavior related to research use. Improving the use of scientific information in policymaking can reduce population-level substance misuse by increasing the availability of evidence-based prevention programs and policies.
Вмешательства
- Поведенческое Intervention: RPC Group
The RPC model entails seven interrelated steps including a capacity building and collaboration phase. Throughout the implementation, researchers are provided direct access to intermediary support from our trained RPC fellows who facilitate RPC activity at each step coordinated by an implementation supervisor. Importantly, this model does not involve any lobbying. Consistent with NIH guidelines for grantees, the RPC instead aims to "highlight and translate public health evidence…; conduct coaliti - Поведенческое Active Comparator: Control Group
Control group participants will receive "light touch" research support, similar to previous work (e.g., an RPC associate will send publicly available research materials in response to research requests). This light touch control condition will increase responsiveness of state officials to survey follow up requests.
Первичные конечные точки
- RPC impact on introduction of evidence-informed bills [Срок оценки: Baseline, post intervention, and 6-months post intervention]
Вторичные конечные точки (4)
- RPC impact on legislators' perceived use of prevention research [Срок оценки: Baseline, post intervention, and 6 months post-intervention]
- RPC impact on legislators' engagement with prevention researchers [Срок оценки: Baseline, post collaboration, and 6 months post-intervention]
- RPC impact on state legislators' value of substance misuse prevention science [Срок оценки: Baseline, post intervention, and 6 months post intervention]
- RPC effectiveness on legislators' awareness of substance misuse prevention science [Срок оценки: Baseline, post intervention, and 6 months post-intervention]
Критерии участия
Критерии включения
- State-level public officials
Критерии исключения
- Anyone who is not a state-level public official
Критерии приведены из реестра в оригинале (на английском). Окончательную оценку соответствия проводит исследовательский центр.
Здоровые добровольцы: Да
Дизайн исследования
- Распределение
- Рандомизированное
- Модель
- Параллельные группы
- Маскирование
- Простое слепое
- Основная цель
- Другое
Центры проведения
США · 1 центр
- Penn State University — University Park
Идентификаторы
NCT: NCT06856148 · STUDY00021641 · R01DA056627