Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40242346›Full record

ArticlePublic administration review

Bringing Rigor to the Use of Evidence in Policy Making: Translating Early Evidence.

Daniel Max Crowley, J Taylor Scott

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Public administration review. 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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

2 authors.

Daniel Max Crowleyassistant professor of human development and family studies at Pennsylvania State University and directs the Prevention Economics Planning and Research Program in the Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center. His research focuses on strengthening methods for conducting benefit-cost analyses of preventive interventions, leveraging administrative data to understand the fiscal impact of prevention, and facilitating evidence-based policy making through strategic investments in preventive services.
J Taylor Scottassistant professor in the Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center at Pennsylvania State University and project coordinator for the Research to Policy Collaboration. Her work seeks to strengthen the use of empirical evidence by policy makers and inform policy-relevant research by facilitating connections between researchers and policy makers. This includes evaluating and strengthening models for translating science into policy.

Funding

STRATIFIED CLUSTER RANDOMIZED TRIAL (SCRT) OF A CLINICAL DECISION RULE (CDR) FOR ABUSIVE HEAD TRAUMA (AHT)P50HD089922 · NICHD · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI Hannah Milena Caroline Schreier · 2017 to 2026
$16.9M
NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD089922
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beyond the evidence provided by randomized controlled trials, there is a need for supplementing and contextualizing efficacy findings through early evidence. This may include evidence of program costs, quality implementation processes, and impact of programs on different groups. This article considers the Quality and Impact of Component Evidence Assessment and other exemplary efforts for translating early evidence for policy making within a common framework. This framework includes processes for strategic review, development of guiding standards on the quality of evidence, and active communication with policy makers.

Identifiers

PMID40242346
PMCPMC12001859

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.