ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2016
Framing research for state policymakers who place a priority on cancer.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Using narratives to impact health policy-making: a systematic review.Health research policy and systems · 2019Pooled it
- Strategies for Effective Public Health Communication in a Complex Information Environment.Annual review of public health · 2025Review
- Economic Burden Associated With Untreated Mental Illness in Indiana.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- Opportunities to improve policy dissemination by tailoring communication materials to the research priorities of legislators.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- European-wide policymaking at the urban level: a qualitative study.European journal of public health · 2021Article
- Linking Data on Constituent Health with Elected Officials' Opinions: Associations Between Urban Health Disparities and Mayoral Officials' Beliefs About Health Disparities in Their Cities.The Milbank quarterly · 2021Article
- Arguments in favor of and against the HPV vaccine school-entry requirement in Puerto Rico: a content analysis of newspaper media.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2021Article
- Using a Twitter Chat to Rapidly Identify Barriers and Policy Solutions for Metastatic Breast Cancer Care: Qualitative Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2021Article
- Translating behavioral medicine evidence to public policy.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2019Article
- Audience segmentation to disseminate behavioral health evidence to legislators: an empirical clustering analysis.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Using Geospatial Analysis to Determine Access Gaps Among Children with Special Healthcare Needs.Health equity · 2018Article
- An audience research study to disseminate evidence about comprehensive state mental health parity legislation to US State policymakers: protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2017Article
- Dissemination and Implementation Science Training Needs: Insights From Practitioners and Researchers.American journal of preventive medicine · 2017Article
- Comparison of Research Framing Preferences and Information Use of State Legislators and Advocates Involved in Cancer Control, United States, 2012-2013.Preventing chronic disease · 2017Article
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
purposeDespite the potential for reducing the cancer burden via state policy change, few data exist on how best to disseminate research information to influence state legislators' policy choices. We explored: (1) the relative importance of core framing issues (source, presentation, timeliness) among policymakers who prioritize cancer and those who do not prioritize cancer and (2) the predictors of use of research in policymaking.
methodsCross-sectional data were collected from US state policymakers (i.e., legislators elected to state houses or senates) from January through October 2012 (n = 862). One-way analysis of variance was performed to investigate the association of the priority of cancer variable with outcome variables. Multivariate logistic regression models examined predictors of the influence of research information.
resultsLegislators who prioritized cancer tended to rate characteristics that make research information useful higher than those who did not prioritize cancer. Among differences that were statistically significant were three items in the "source" domain (relevance, delivered by someone respected, supports one's own position), one item in the "presentation" domain (telling a story related to constituents) and two items in the "timeliness" domain (high current state priority, feasible when information is received). Participants who prioritized cancer risk factors were 80 % more likely to rate research information as one of their top reasons for choosing an issue on which to work.
conclusionsOur results suggest the importance of narrative forms of communication and that research information needs to be relevant to the policymakers' constituents in a brief, concise format.
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.