Informing Healthy Public Policy

告知健康的公共政策

• 批准号: MC_UU_12017/15
• 负责人: Peter Craig
• 金额: $ 565.87万
• 依托单位: University of Glasgow
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Intramural
• 财政年份: 2015
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2015 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=MC_UU_12017%2F15
• 关键词: Informing; Healthy; Public; Policy

Public health decision makers and the public are exposed to a wide range of research evidence, that can often conflict or be uncertain. The way this evidence is presented, in scientific journals, political debates and in the news, influences how people understand, use, and act on it. We shall explore how information about health is communicated, and what people know and think about issues and policies, to better understand how we can communicate research findings into policy debates. There has also been much debate in recent years about how research evidence can be made more useful and relevant to decision makers. We shall investigate ways in which we can improve the reliability and usefulness of studies that bring together large quantities of complex evidence.Decision makers can also face difficulties with the quality of evidence available to them. Even large-scale evaluations of public health interventions are often inconclusive or hard to apply to real-life decisions. The elements of a more ‘fit for purpose’ approach to evaluation are well known, but rarely combined into a coherent package. These include stakeholder involvement, careful priority setting, research designs that can withstand external shocks, best use of routinely collected data, and the reporting of findings in ways that policy-makers and practitioners can readily apply to their own decisions. We will combine these elements into robust approaches to evaluating public health policies and programmes

公共卫生决策者和公众接触到广泛的研究证据，这些证据往往相互矛盾或不确定。这些证据在科学期刊、政治辩论和新闻中的呈现方式，影响着人们如何理解、使用和采取行动。我们将探讨有关健康的信息是如何传播的，以及人们对问题和政策的了解和思考，以更好地理解我们如何将研究结果传播到政策辩论中。近年来，关于如何使研究证据对决策者更有用和更相关的问题也有很多争论。我们将探讨如何提高研究的可靠性和有效性，因为研究汇集了大量复杂的证据，决策者也可能面临证据质量的困难。即使是对公共卫生干预措施的大规模评估，也往往是不确定的，或者很难应用于现实生活中的决策。一个更“切合目的”的评价方法的要素是众所周知的，但很少结合成一个连贯的一揽子方案。其中包括利益攸关方的参与、认真确定优先事项、能够承受外部冲击的研究设计、最佳利用例行收集的数据，以及以决策者和实践者能够随时应用于自己的决策的方式报告研究结果。我们将把这些要素联合收割机纳入评估公共卫生政策和方案的强有力的方法

项目成果

Vulnerable children, stigmatised smokers: The social construction of target audiences in media debates on policies regulating smoking in vehicles.

• DOI: 10.1177/1363459316633279
• 发表时间: 2017-11
• 期刊: Health (London, England : 1997)
• 作者: Bain J;Weishaar H;Semple S;Duffy S;Hilton S
• 通讯作者: Hilton S

Fluoroquinolone use and associated adverse drug events in England

英国氟喹诺酮类药物的使用和相关药物不良事件

• DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2018.11.001
• 发表时间: 2019
• 期刊: Journal of Infection
• 影响因子: 28.2
• 作者: Baddour L

Impacts of smoke-free public places legislation on inequalities in youth smoking uptake: study protocol for a secondary analysis of UK survey data.

• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022490
• 发表时间: 2018-03-27
• 期刊: BMJ open
• 影响因子: 2.9
• 作者: Anyanwu PE;Craig P;Katikireddi SV;Green MJ
• 通讯作者: Green MJ

Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

根据1990-2019年204个国家和地区卫生服务有效覆盖指数衡量全民健康覆盖：对2019年全球疾病负担研究的系统分析

• DOI: 10.5451/unibas-ep91086
• 作者: (:unav)

Impact of UK Tobacco Control Policies on Inequalities in Youth Smoking Uptake: A Natural Experiment Study.

• DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntaa101
• 发表时间: 2020-10-29
• 期刊: Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco
• 作者: Anyanwu PE;Craig P;Katikireddi SV;Green MJ
• 通讯作者: Green MJ