ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2026
Building evidence for prevention: case studies on research impacts and influences on health policy, practice, and research capacity.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublic health research must influence both the research field and health sector. This study explored the impacts of four multi-study prevention research programs conducted by an Australian public health research group.
methodsUsing a case study methodology and multiple data sources-document review, interviews, survey, and expert assessments-we studied the trajectories linking research to impact. Analyses included types of evidence generated, context, translational efforts, and impacts across four domains: knowledge development; use of research in the research system; health policy and practice; and health and social impacts. Expert reviewers assessed case studies against indicators covering each impact domain. A framework analysis was used to compare trajectories across cases.
resultsEach research program was assessed as having moderate to high impact across all domains. These highly applied, policy relevant research programs achieved significant peer review publications and citations. Both policy-initiated and research-initiated programs included policy collaborators as co-authors. All case studies were policy-aligned and addressed translation factors; and the capacity of individual researchers, the research organization's culture and the degree of collaboration were facilitators of impact.
conclusionsWe found clear evidence of demonstrable policy, practice and academic impacts, with variations in impact degree and types. The differing trajectories signal the importance of assessing impacts in relation to the purpose and focus of the research. These case studies illustrate ways that research can be impactful and how classic translational enabling factors can be enhanced. Sophisticated research translation skills and a collaborative organizational culture appear key attributes for achieving impact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.