Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2019: where
- PDF / 2,021,213 Bytes
- 85 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 33 Downloads / 194 Views
MEETING ABSTRACTS
Open Access
Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2019: where the rubber meets the road: the intersection of research, policy, and practice - part 2 Seattle, WA, USA. 12-14 September 2019 Published: 30 September 2020
About this supplement This article has been published as part of Implementation Science Volume 15 Supplement 2, 2020: Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2019: Where the rubber meets the road: The intersection of research, policy, and practice - Part 2. The first part of this supplement is available online at https://implementationscience. biomedcentral.com/articles/supplements/volume-15supplement-3. Please note that this is part 2 of 2. A1 Public opinion as an outer-contextual factor in health policy D&I research and practice: evidence that the public cares about evidence Correspondence: Jonathan Purtle ([email protected]) Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA Implementation Science 2020, 15(Suppl 2):A1 Background Barriers to evidence-informed health policymaking are well-established [1]. Although many barriers are technical in nature (e.g., poor communication of research findings) [2], a major impediment stems from the political nature of policymaking [3-4]. Public opinion is a key aspect of politics; and one that is relevant to efforts to promote evidenceinformed policymaking because public opinion influences policymakers’ behaviors [5-6]. Thus, if policymakers learn that the public
wants their decisions to be supported by evidence, this information could spur policymakers to make more evidence-informed health policy decisions and demonstrate evidence use to their constituents. However, no prior research has examined public opinion about evidenceinformed policymaking. This study sought to characterize public opinion about the influence that evidence should, and does, have on health policy development in U.S. Congress relative to other factors and examine differences in opinion by political party affiliation. Materials and Methods A public opinion survey was conducted in 2018 using the SSRS Probability Panel (N=532), a nationally representative internet panel. Respondents separately rated the extent to which six factors (e.g., evidence, budget impact, industry interests) “should have” and “currently have” influence on U.S. congresspersons’ health policy decisions. Results Evidence (59%) was the most frequently identified factor that should have “a lot of influence” on health policy development, but only 11% of respondents thought that evidence currently has “a lot of influence” (p3 treated mental health diagnoses versus others. Mental health hospitalization rate demonstrated a robust drop during facilitation; this finding withstood four internal validity tests [3]. Conclusions Working solely at the clinician level with minimal study-funded support, CCM implementation yielded provider and Veteran benefi
Data Loading...
