Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32517640›Full record

ArticlePsychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)2020

Dissemination Strategies to Accelerate the Policy Impact of Children's Mental Health Services Research.

Jonathan Purtle, Katherine L Nelson, Eric J Bruns, Kimberly E Hoagwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Jonathan PurtleDepartment of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood).
Katherine L NelsonDepartment of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood).
Eric J BrunsDepartment of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood).
Kimberly E HoagwoodDepartment of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood).

Funding

Research Methods CoreP30MH090322 · NIMH · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI HOAGWOOD, KIMBERLY E. · 2011 to 2015
$8.1M
National Survey of State Policy Decision-making and SimulationP50MH113662 · NIMH · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI HORWITZ, SARAH MCCUE · 2019 to 2022
$6.9M
NIMH NIH HHS P30 MH090322NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH113662
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The United States is in the midst of a children's mental health crisis, with rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide increasing precipitously. Evidence produced by children's mental health services research can help address this crisis by informing public policy decisions about service delivery, system design, and investments in the social determinants of mental health. Unfortunately, the policy impact of children's mental health services research is limited because evidence often fails to reach policy makers, be responsive to their needs, resonate with their worldview, or reflect the contexts in which they make decisions. Dissemination strategies-defined as the development and targeted distribution of messages and materials about research evidence pertaining to a specific issue or intervention-can help address these challenges. Yet, limited integrated guidance exists to inform the design of such strategies. This article addresses this need by synthesizing the results of empirical studies to provide guidance about how to enhance the dissemination of children's mental health services research to policy makers. The article provides four recommendations about the content of policy maker-focused dissemination materials, discusses how strategic framing and message tailoring can increase the chances that evidence is persuasive to policy makers, and highlights strategies to ensure that evidence reaches policy makers.

Indexed as

Mental Health ServicesAnxiety DisordersChildHealth PolicyHealth Services ResearchHumansMental HealthPublic PolicyUnited StatesChild psychiatry/generalChildren’s mental healthDisseminationEvidence-informed policy makingImplementation sciencePublic policy issues

Identifiers

PMID32517640
PMCPMC9721469

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.