Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37790180›Full record

ArticleImplementation research and practice

Unintended consequences of disseminating behavioral health evidence to policymakers: Results from a survey-based experiment.

Jonathan Purtle, Katherine L Nelson, Félice Lê-Scherban, Sarah E Gollust

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation research and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jonathan PurtleDepartment of Public Health Policy & Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York, NY, USA.
Katherine L NelsonDornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Félice Lê-ScherbanDornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1920-724X
Sarah E GollustDivision of Health Policy & Management, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Drexel University · USNew York University · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Communication research demonstrates that messages often have unintended consequences, but this work has received limited attention in implementation science. This dissemination experiment sought to determine whether state-tailored policy briefs about the behavioral health consequences of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), compared to national policy briefs on the topic, increased state legislators'/staffers' perceptions of the policy brief relevance and parental blame for the consequences of ACEs, and whether effects differed between Democrats and Republicans. Method: A preregistered, web-based survey experiment with U.S. state legislators/staffers was conducted in 2021 ( Results: The mean policy brief relevance score was 4.1% higher in the intervention than in the control condition ( Conclusions: Despite limited statistical power, state-tailored policy briefs significantly increased state legislators'/staffers' perceptions of parental blame for the behavioral health consequences of ACEs, relative to a policy brief with national data. Unintended messaging effects warrant greater attention in dissemination research and practice.

Indexed as

disseminationdissemination evaluationpolicy

Identifiers

PMID37790180
PMCPMC10170598
OpenAlexW4381924916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.