ArticleAmerican journal of public health2015
Importance of scientific resources among local public health practitioners.
Article in American journal of public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Are public health researchers designing for dissemination? Findings from a national survey in China.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Big food and drink sponsorship of conferences and speakers: a case study of one multinational company's influence over knowledge dissemination and professional engagement.Public health nutrition · 2023Article
- Article
- Building the Evidence Base to Inform Planned Intervention Adaptations by Practitioners Serving Health Disparity Populations.American journal of public health · 2019Article
- How the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership shapes the public health workforce.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2018Article
- Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Public Health: Reconciling the Pulls of Practice and the Push of Research.Annual review of public health · 2018Review
- Preparing Public Health Professionals to Make Evidence-Based Decisions: A Comparison of Training Delivery Methods in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2018Article
- Evaluation of an online training for improving self-reported evidence-based decision-making skills in cancer control among public health professionals.Public health · 2017Article
- Learning About and Using Research Evidence Among Public Health Practitioners.American journal of preventive medicine · 2017Article
- Challenges and Innovations in Surveying the Governmental Public Health Workforce.American journal of public health · 2016Article
- The role of researchers in disseminating evidence to public health practice settings: a cross-sectional study.Health research policy and systems · 2016Article
- The effectiveness of workplace interventions to increase physical activity and decrease sedentary behaviour in adults: protocol for a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2015Article
- Six Public Policy Recommendations to Increase the Translation and Utilization of Research Evidence in Public Health Practice.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
- Getting the Word Out: New Approaches for Disseminating Public Health Science.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe examined the perceived importance of scientific resources for decision-making among local health department (LHD) practitioners in the United States.
methodsWe used data from LHD practitioners (n = 849). Respondents ranked important decision-making resources, methods for learning about public health research, and academic journal use. We calculated descriptive statistics and used logistic regression to measure associations of individual and LHD characteristics with importance of scientific resources.
resultsSystematic reviews of scientific literature (24.7%) were most frequently ranked as important among scientific resources, followed by scientific reports (15.9%), general literature review articles (6.5%), and 1 or a few scientific studies (4.8%). Graduate-level education (adjusted odds ratios [AORs] = 1.7-3.5), larger LHD size (AORs = 2.0-3.5), and leadership support (AOR = 1.6; 95% confidence interval = 1.1, 2.3) were associated with a higher ranking of importance of scientific resources.
conclusionsGraduate training, larger LHD size, and leadership that supports a culture of evidence-based decision-making may increase the likelihood of practitioners viewing scientific resources as important. Targeting communication channels that practitioners view as important can also guide research dissemination strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.