Building the Science of Evidence-Informed Prevention Policy: A Multi-level Model for Supporting Substance Misuse Prevention

项目摘要 如果科学要为政策提供信息并最终改善公共卫生，该领域需要一个有效的战略， 支持决策者使用研究证据。然而，我们的领域缺乏一个基于证据的模型， 支持州政策制定者在制定立法时利用预防研究。相反，我们继续 在很大程度上依赖于将预防研究转化为行动的临时战略（例如，机会性外联和应对 政策制定者的要求，如果或当他们提出）。因此，我们提出了一个正式的实验研究， 以理论为基础的方法，支持决策者使用不涉及游说的科学证据- 研究与政策协作（RPC）模式。RPC促进了政策与 通过实施系统的能力建设和外联战略，加强与研究界的合作。先前 RPC的实验工作表明，该模型能够增加 研究人员和政策制定者，增加政策制定者对研究证据的价值，并改善他们对 1我们提出了一个州一级的RPC随机对照试验（N = 30个州立法机构），将评估该模型改善州政策制定者之间接触的能力。 和预防科学界，建立决策者对药物滥用的认识和价值观 预防研究，以及随后在整个决策过程中使用研究证据。到 为此，我们将测试三个具体的研究目标。目标1将评估研究的历史和当前使用情况 国家立法中有关预防药物滥用的证据。这将涉及定性编码， 在过去的五年里，州立法机构提出的法案。目标2将比较 在干预和控制条件之间与预防研究人员接触。此外，我们将 评估RPC模型如何影响决策者的价值观和对药物滥用预防的认识， 时间使用经过验证的调查在三个时间点。目标3将评估RPC的有效性， 立法者通过观察和量化立法者行为的变化，在立法中实际使用研究 与研究用途有关。在决策中更好地利用科学信息可以减少人口 通过增加基于证据的预防方案和政策的可用性来减少药物滥用。

Project Summary 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, our field lacks an evidence-based model designed for supporting state policymakers’ use of prevention research in crafting legislation. Instead, we continue 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, we propose 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. 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 We propose 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, we 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, we 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.