Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34780008›Full record

ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2022

The Role of Open Science Practices in Scaling Evidence-Based Prevention Programs.

Lauren H Supplee, Robert T Ammerman, Anne K Duggan, John A List, Dana Suskind

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Open Science Standards at Journals that Inform Evidence-Based Policy.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2023
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lauren H SuppleeWilliam T. Grant Foundation, New York, NY, USA. lauren.supplee@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3766-3441
Robert T Ammerman *Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6905-5024
Anne K Duggan *Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3465-3662
John A List *University of Chicago, Chicago, USA.
Dana Suskind *University of Chicago, Chicago, USA.

Funding

HRSA HHS UD5MC30792
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of creating evidence-based programs is to scale them at sufficient breadth to support population-level improvements in critical outcomes. However, this promise is challenging to fulfill. One of the biggest issues for the field is the reduction in effect sizes seen when a program is taken to scale. This paper discusses an economic perspective that identifies the underlying incentives in the research process that lead to scale up problems and to deliver potential solutions to strengthen outcomes at scale. The principles of open science are well aligned with this goal. One prevention program that has begun to scale across the USA is early childhood home visiting. While there is substantial impact research on home visiting, overall average effect size is .10 and a recent national randomized trial found attenuated effect sizes in programs implemented under real-world conditions. The paper concludes with a case study of the relevance of the economic model and open science in developing and scaling evidence-based home visiting. The case study considers how the traditional approach for testing interventions has influenced home visiting's evolution to date and how open science practices could have supported efforts to maintain impacts while scaling home visiting. It concludes by considering how open science can accelerate the refinement and scaling of home visiting interventions going forward, through accelerated translation of research into policy and practice.

Indexed as

House CallsPostnatal CareChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansPregnancyEvidence-based programsHome visitingOpen scienceScaling

Identifiers

PMID34780008
PMCPMC9283157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.