Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28215386›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2017

Learning About and Using Research Evidence Among Public Health Practitioners.

Rebekah R Jacob, Peg M Allen, Linda J Ahrendt, Ross C Brownson

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Getting the Word Out: New Approaches for Disseminating Public Health Science.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rebekah R JacobNine Network of Public Media, St. Louis, Missouri. Electronic address: rjacob@ketc.org.
Peg M AllenPrevention Research Center in St. Louis, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Linda J AhrendtSouth Dakota Department of Health, Pierre, South Dakota.
Ross C BrownsonPrevention Research Center in St. Louis, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri; School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Washington University in St. Louis · USSouth Dakota Department of Health · US

Funding

Disseminating Evidence-Based Interventions to Control CancerR01CA160327 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BROWNSON, ROSS C · 2012 to 2017
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA160327
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFunders and accreditation standards increasingly call on state and local public health agencies to use the best available science. Using research evidence is a key process in practicing evidence-based decision making (EBDM). This study explored preferences for and uses of research evidence, and examined correlates regarding frequency of use.

methodsIn 2014, eligible staff from 12 state health departments and their partnering agencies were invited to complete an online self-report questionnaire and achieved an 82% response rate (1,237/1,509). The cross-sectional data analyzed in 2015 were baseline to a study on enhancing EBDM capacity and supports.

resultsWebinars/workshops was the most frequently selected method to learn public health findings among those in state and local health departments, whereas academic journals was the top selection by those in universities and healthcare facilities (p<0.001). Several modifiable EBDM practices were associated with more frequent use of research evidence, including direct supervisor expectations for EBDM use and performance evaluation based partially on EBDM use (AOR=2.5, 95% CI=1.9, 3.2 and AOR=2.5, 95% CI=2.1, 2.9, respectively). Increased numbers of EBDM practices were associated with higher odds of frequent research evidence use. Participant characteristics associated with higher research evidence use and adjusted for were job role, education attainment, and gender.

conclusionsTo translate research into public health practice, researchers can tailor evidence on intervention implementation and effectiveness and disease burden to accessible and preferred formats for public health workers and partners. Management practices to support evidence-based disease prevention can be instituted and fostered in public health and partnering agencies.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based PracticePublic Health PracticeFemaleHealth PersonnelHealth PromotionHumansMalePreventive Medicine

Identifiers

PMID28215386
PMCPMC5581939
OpenAlexW2588026210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.