Getting research to the policy table: a qualitative study with public health researchers on engaging with policy makers

Perspectives of old-age and dementia researchers on communication with policymakers and public research funding decision-makers: an international cross-sectional survey

Introduction

Society commonly believes that research knowledge is complementary to public decision-making. This study aimed to understand the perspectives and implications of dementia researchers communicating with policymakers and public research decision-makers (public officials).

Methods

This study uses 24 questions from an anonymous, online survey, which was received by 392 members of nine European, Latin American, and United States medical researcher associations/networks in the fields of age-related neurological degeneration and dementia medicine. The data were analyzed via crosstab analysis, two group comparison analyses, and a logistic regression model.

Results

In total, 91 (23.2%) respondents completed the questionnaire. Eight independent variables were related to researchers' research discipline, research remuneration, experience, authorship, H-index, and research grants. The statistically significant variables determining whether the respondents had contact with public officials were "Years of research experience" (p = 0.004), "Number of articles first-authored in the last 5 years" (p = 0.007), and "Average H-index in the last 5 years" (p = 0.048) [median (IQR)]; 47% of the surveyed researchers had been in contact with public officials in the last 12 months. The most frequently communicated topics were the importance of their own research to society (61%) and their own funding (60%); 87% (n = 79) of the researchers did not believe that public officials had a very good understanding of their dementia research.

Conclusion

Less than half (47%) of dementia researchers communicate with public officials, and they communicate mostly about the importance of their own research and funding their own research. Nine of 10 researchers do not believe that public officials understand their research well.

Bridging Public Health Research and State-Level Policy: The Texas Research-to-Policy Collaboration Project

Purpose and Objectives

Significant barriers to the implementation of evidence-based policy exist. Establishing an infrastructure and resources to support this process at the state level can accelerate the translation of research into practice. This study describes the adaptation and initial evaluation of the Texas Research-to-Policy Collaboration (TX RPC) Project, focusing on the adaptation process, legislative public health policy priorities, and baseline researcher policy knowledge and self-efficacy.

Intervention Approach

The federal Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) method was adapted to the Texas legislative process in 2020. Policymakers and public health researchers were recruited using direct outreach and referrals. Legislators or their aides were interviewed to determine health policy needs, which directed the development of legislator resources, webinars, and recruitment of additional public health researchers with specific expertise. Researchers were trained to facilitate communication with policymakers, and TX RPC Project staff facilitated legislator and researcher meetings to provide data and policy input.

Evaluation Methods

Baseline surveys were completed with legislators to assess the use of health researchers in policy. Surveys were also administered before training to researchers assessing self-efficacy, knowledge, and training needs. Qualitative data from the legislator interviews were analyzed using inductive and deductive approaches. Quantitative survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics for scales and individual survey items.

Results

Legislative offices (n = 21) identified health care access, mental health, and health disparities as key health issues. Legislators reported that health data were important but did not actively involve researchers in legislation. Researchers (n = 73) reported that policy informed their work but had low engagement with legislators. Researcher training surveys indicated lower policy self-efficacy and knowledge and the need for additional training.

Implications for Public Health

Adaptation of the RPC model for state-level health policy is feasible but necessitates logistical changes based on the unique legislative body. Researchers need training and resources to engage with policymakers.

Role of low-impact-factor journals in conservation implementation

Academic review, promotion, and tenure processes place a premium on frequent publication in high-impact factor (IF) journals. However, conservation often relies on species-specific information that is unlikely to have the broad appeal needed for high-IF journals. Instead, this information is often distributed in low-IF, taxa- and region-specific journals. This suggests a potential mismatch between the incentives for academic researchers and the scientific needs of conservation implementation. To explore this mismatch, we looked at federal implementation of the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA), which requires the use of the "best available science" to list a species as endangered or threatened and thus receive powerful legal protections. In assessing the relationship between academic sources of this "best available science" and ESA implementation, we looked at the 13,292 sources (e.g., academic journals, books, reports, regulations, personal communications, etc.) cited by the second Obama administration (2012-2016) across all ESA listings. We compared the IFs of all 4836 journals that published peer-reviewed papers cited in these listings against their citation frequency in ESA listings to determine whether a journal's IF varied in proportion with its contribution to federal conservation. Most of the peer-reviewed academic articles referenced in ESA listings came from low-IF or no-IF journals that tended to focus on specific taxa or regions. Although we support continued attention to cutting-edge, multidisciplinary science for its ability to chart new pathways and paradigms, our findings stress the need to value and fund the taxa- and region-specific science that underpins actionable conservation laws.

When experts disagree: interviews with public health experts on health outcomes in the UK 2010-2020

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain the views of public health experts on adverse trends in life expectancy across England and Wales over the past decade, causal factors, possible solutions, and their opinions about how the prepandemic situation influenced the UK's COVID-19 response.

STUDY DESIGN

Semistructured, in-depth interviews.

METHODS

Nineteen public health experts were identified by purposeful sampling and invited to take part via e-mail. Sixty-three percent responded and participated (n = 12), six females and six males. Interviews took place via Microsoft Teams between November 2021 and January 2022. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

There was no consensus on the significance of the stalling and, at some ages, reversal of previous improvements in life expectancy between 2010 and 2020. Explanations offered included data misinterpretation, widening health inequalities, and disinvestment in public services, as well as some disease-specific causes. Those accepting that the decline was concerning linked it to social factors and suggested solutions based on increased investment and implementing existing evidence on how to reduce health inequalities. These interviewees also pointed to the same factors playing a role in the UK's poor COVID-19 response, highlighting the need to understand and address these underlying issues as part of pandemic preparedness.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no consensus among a group of influential public health experts in the UK on the scale, nature, and explanations of recent trends in life expectancy. A majority called for implementation of existing evidence on reducing inequalities, especially in the wake of COVID-19. However, without agreement on what the problem is, action is likely to remain elusive.

Challenges of using modelling evidence in the visceral leishmaniasis elimination programme in India

As India comes closer to the elimination of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) as a public health problem, surveillance efforts and elimination targets must be continuously revised and strengthened. Mathematical modelling is a compelling research discipline for informing policy and programme design in its capacity to project incidence across space and time, the likelihood of achieving benchmarks, and the impact of different interventions. To gauge the extent to which modelling informs policy in India, this qualitative analysis explores how and whether policy makers understand, value, and reference recently produced VL modelling research. Sixteen semi-structured interviews were carried out with both users- and producers- of VL modelling research, guided by a knowledge utilisation framework grounded in knowledge translation theory. Participants reported that barriers to knowledge utilisation include 1) scepticism that models accurately reflect transmission dynamics, 2) failure of modellers to apply their analyses to specific programme operations, and 3) lack of accountability in the process of translating knowledge to policy. Political trust and support are needed to translate knowledge into programme activities, and employment of a communication intermediary may be a necessary approach to improve this process.

“You Can’t Look at an Orange and Draw a Banana”: Using Research Evidence to Develop Relevant Health Policy in Ghana

We explored inhibitors and enablers of using health policy and systems research to inform the policy process in Ghana. The findings suggest a myriad of factors influencing evidence-based policy development, including the strength of the relationships between policy makers and research producers.

We examined factors that either enabled or inhibited the process of evidence-based decision making regarding health policy in Ghana. We conducted qualitative interviews with 2 major groups of stakeholders: health policy and systems research producers (research producers [RPs]) and policy makers (PMs). In-depth interviews were conducted with 12 RPs, who were representatives from 11 health policy and systems research institutions; and 12 PMs working in various national health-related agencies, ministries, and departments. We analyzed the data using the thematic analysis approach. Interview results showed 5 recurring themes in their discussion of enablers and inhibitors of the evidence-to-policy process: (1) the quality, relevance, and quantity of available research evidence; (2) how findings are communicated to PMs; (3) the strength of relationships between RPs and PMs; (4) available structures that promote evidence-based policy making; and (5) the political context in which research and policy making occurs. These findings point to some specific areas for further collaboration and communication among Ghanaian stakeholders to ensure that appropriate health policies are developed from an evidence base.

Improving Vitamin D Intake in Young Children-Can an Infographic Help Parents and Carers Understand the Recommendations?

Vitamin D deficiency is a serious public health issue in the United Kingdom. Those at increased risk, such as pregnant women, children under 5 years and people from ethnic groups with dark skin, are not all achieving their recommended vitamin D. Effective vitamin D education is warranted. A qualitative study was undertaken to evaluate the acceptability and understanding of a vitamin D infographic, developed using recommendations from previous research. Fifteen parents/carers, recruited through local playgroups and adverts on popular parent websites, participated in focus groups and telephone interviews. The majority were female, White British and educated to degree level. A thematic analysis methodology was applied. The findings indicated that understanding and acceptability of the infographic were satisfactory, but improvements were recommended to aid interpretation and create more accessible information. These included additional content (what vitamin D is; other sources; its health benefits; methods/doses for administration and scientific symbols used) and improved presentation (eye-catching, less text, simpler language, more images and a logo). Once finalized, the infographic could be a useful tool to educate families around vitamin D supplementation guidelines, support the UK Healthy Start vitamins scheme and help improve vitamin D status for pregnant and lactating women and young children.

Future-Proofing Geriatric Mental Health Care Services in India: Training and Policy Directions

BACKGROUND

A burgeoning rise in the elderly subpopulation is being noted in India. This rise has already earned the designation as a shining nation by the United Nations/World Health Organization. This growth will take the elderly subpopulation to 324 million persons above 60 years by 2050. The mental health needs of this subpopulation are varied and nuanced compared to that of the general population. The risk and prevalence of mental health morbidity are also greater. There is an urgent need to gear up the health care systems.

CONSIDERATIONS

Various aspects of the ongoing demographic transitions are considered alongside available health information. Legislative mandates and laws are also reviewed to provide context to qualify the action points and recommendations. Recommendations, India must act urgently to strengthen health care delivery systems in a concurrent multipronged approach. These efforts should focus on developing trained Human Resources and adequate infrastructural resources. Review mechanisms to inform on required updates on best practices and evidence-based medicine must also be incorporated and developed to perform periodically.

Health research knowledge translation into policy in Zambia: policy-maker and researcher perspectives

Background

The translation of public health research evidence into policy is critical to strengthening the capacity of local health systems to respond to major health challenges. However, a limited amount of public health research evidence generated in developing countries is actually translated into policy because of various factors. This study sought to explore the process of health research knowledge translation into policy and to identify factors that facilitate or hinder the process in Zambia.

Methods

This work was an exploratory qualitative study comprising two phases. Firstly, a document review of health policies and strategic frameworks governing research was undertaken to understand the macro-environment for knowledge translation in Zambia. Secondly, key informant interviews were conducted with those responsible for health research and policy formulation. The study interviewed 15 key informants and a thematic analysis approach was used.

Results

The document review showed that there are policy efforts to promote knowledge translation through improvement of the research macro-environment. However, the interviews showed that coordination and linkage of the knowledge creation, translation and policy-making processes remains a challenge owing to lack of research knowledge translation capacity, limited resources and lack of knowledge hubs. Emerging local research leadership and the availability of existing stock of underutilized local health research data provide an opportunity to enhance knowledge translation to feed into policy processes in Zambia.

Conclusions

Public health research knowledge translation into policy remains a challenge in Zambia. To enhance the uptake of research evidence in policy-making, this study suggests the need for improved coordination, financing and capacity-building in knowledge translation processes for both health researchers and policy-makers.

"My good friends on the other side of the aisle aren't bothered by those facts": U.S. State legislators' use of evidence in making policy on abortion

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, U.S. states have passed many restrictive abortion policies with a rationale of protecting health and safety, in apparent contravention of abundant scientific evidence on abortion safety. This study explored whether and how state legislators use scientific evidence when deciding abortion policy.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted 29 semi-structured interviews with state legislators and their aides in Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia in March through July 2017. We recruited via e-mail to members of all health-related committees of the General Assembly in each state, plus sponsors and co-sponsors of 2017 abortion bills, with follow-up via phone and in person. We conducted iterative thematic analysis of all interview transcripts.

RESULTS

We found no cases of lawmakers' decisions on abortion being shifted by evidence. However, some lawmakers used evidence in simplified form to support their claims on abortion. Lawmakers gave credence to evidence they received from trusted sources, and that which supported their pre-existing policy preferences. Personal stories appeared more convincing than evidence, with participants drawing broad conclusions from anecdotes. Democrats and Republicans had different views on bias in evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

In this sample, evidence did not drive state legislators' policymaking on abortion. However, evidence did help inform high-level understanding of abortion, if such evidence supported legislators' pre-existing policy preferences. This work may help public health practitioners and researchers develop more realistic expectations for how research interacts with policymaking.

IMPLICATIONS OF THIS WORK

To increase the utility of research, reproductive health researchers and practitioners should 1) work with established intermediaries to convey findings to lawmakers; 2) present stories that illustrate research findings; and 3) consider the evidence needs of the judicial branch, in addition to those of legislators.

Pathways for translating behavioral medicine research to practice and policy

The diversity of behavioral medicine, including investigators' disciplines, health conditions, settings, and intervention approaches, creates challenges for promoting the translation of research to practice and policy. Most papers on research translation focus on one pathway, so there is a need for a model that considers multiple pathways of research translation. The purpose is to propose a model of translating research to practice and policy that is broad enough to apply to many behavioral medicine scenarios and suggests options for behavioral medicine investigators to become engaged in research translation. This is a commentary, with examples drawn from scientific and gray literature. A model is proposed that describes five pathways of research translation: research, practice, business, policy, and public opinion. Target audiences, approaches, communication materials, and examples are suggested for each translation pathway. Resources are available for overcoming barriers to research translation. The main benefit of becoming engaged in research translation is a higher likelihood of health impact from the research. Researchers can choose one or more of the pathways of research translation that are suitable for their situation.

Process Evaluation and Lessons Learned From Engaging Local Policymakers in the B'More Healthy Communities for Kids Trial

Partnerships linking researchers to the policymaking process can be effective in increasing communication and supporting health policy. However, these policy partnerships rarely conduct process evaluation. The Policy Working Group (Policy WG) was the policy-level intervention of the multilevel B'More Healthy Communities for Kids (BHCK) trial. The group sought to align interests of local policymakers, inform local food and nutrition policy, introduce policymakers to a new simulation modeling, and sustain intervention levels of BHCK. We conducted an evaluation on the Policy WG between July 2013 and May 2016. We evaluated process indicators for reach, dose-delivered, and fidelity and developed a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. The policy intervention was implemented with high reach and dose-delivered. Fidelity measures improved from moderate to nearly high over time. The number of health-related issues on policymakers' agenda increased from 50% in the first 2 years to 150% of the high standard in Year 3. SWOT analysis integrated a stakeholder feedback survey to consider areas of strength, weakness, opportunity, and threats. Although the fidelity of the modeling was low at 37% of the high standard, stakeholders indicated that the simulation modeling should be a primary purpose for policy intervention. Results demonstrate that process evaluation and SWOT analysis is useful for tracking the progress of policy interventions in multilevel trials and can be used to monitor the progress of building partnerships with policymakers.

Researcher and policymaker dialogue: the Policy BUDDIES Project in Western Cape Province, South Africa

Dialogue and exchange between researchers and policy personnel may increase the use of research evidence in policy. We piloted and evaluated a programme of formalised dialogue between researchers and provincial health policymakers in South Africa, called the buddying programme. An external evaluation examined implementation and short-term impact, drawing on documents, in-depth interviews with policymakers, a researcher buddies focus group and our own reflection on what we learnt. We set up buddying with seven policymakers and five researchers on six policy questions. Researchers knew little about policymaking or needs of policymakers. Policymakers respected the contact with researchers, respected researchers’ objectivity and appreciated the formalised approach. Having policymaker champions facilitated the dialogue. Scenarios for policy questions and use were different. One topic was at problem identification stage (contraceptives and HIV risk), four at policy formulation stage (healthy lifestyles, chronic illness medication adherence, integrated care of chronic illness and maternal transmission of HIV to infants) and one at implementation stage (task shifting). Research evidence were used to identify or solve a policy problem (two scenarios), to legitimise a predetermined policy position (three scenarios) or the evidence indirectly influenced the policy (one scenario). The formalised dialogue required in this structured buddying programme took time and commitment from both sides. The programme illustrated the importance of researchers listening, and policymakers understanding what research can offer. Both parties recognised that the structured buddying made the dialogue happen. Often the evidence was helpful in supporting provincial policy decisions that were in the roll-out phase from the national government.

The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future

Review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) processes significantly affect how faculty direct their own career and scholarly progression. Although RPT practices vary between and within institutions, and affect various disciplines, ranks, institution types, genders, and ethnicity in different ways, some consistent themes emerge when investigating what faculty would like to change about RPT. For instance, over the last few decades, RPT processes have generally increased the value placed on research, at the expense of teaching and service, which often results in an incongruity between how faculty actually spend their time vs. what is considered in their evaluation. Another issue relates to publication practices: most agree RPT requirements should encourage peer-reviewed works of high quality, but in practice, the value of publications is often assessed using shortcuts such as the prestige of the publication venue, rather than on the quality and rigor of peer review of each individual item. Open access and online publishing have made these issues even murkier due to misconceptions about peer review practices and concerns about predatory online publishers, which leaves traditional publishing formats the most desired despite their restricted circulation. And, efforts to replace journal-level measures such as the impact factor with more precise article-level metrics (e.g., citation counts and altmetrics) have been slow to integrate with the RPT process. Questions remain as to whether, or how, RPT practices should be changed to better reflect faculty work patterns and reduce pressure to publish in only the most prestigious traditional formats. To determine the most useful way to change RPT, we need to assess further the needs and perceptions of faculty and administrators, and gain a better understanding of the level of influence of written RPT guidelines and policy in an often vague process that is meant to allow for flexibility in assessing individuals.

Integrated knowledge translation in population health intervention research: a case study of implementation and outcomes from a school-based project

BACKGROUND

Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is encouraged in population health intervention research (PHIR) to ensure the co-production of policy-relevant research, yet there is little published literature that reports its implementation and outcomes. The purpose of this study was to describe and evaluate the IKT approach used in a school-based PHIR project to understand how the research informed policy and practice and identify what influenced the IKT process.

METHODS

A case study approach was used to provide an in-depth description of the IKT process and understand the co-production and application of research evidence. Data were collected through document review, a survey with all elementary school principals in the school board (n = 18) following dissemination of School Reports and interviews with the IKT research team (including two researchers and three knowledge users).

RESULTS

Approximately half of the principals reported reading their School Report (52%) and almost all of these principals attributed the partial or full adoption, or implementation, of a new practice as a result of using the information (89%). Key themes related to the IKT process emerged across the interviews, including supportive relationships, role clarity, competing priorities and the complexities of population health interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that, while IKT can support policy and practice, it can be challenging to maintain engagement due to differing priorities and role ambiguity. Additional recognition, investment and research would enable better implementation of the approach, thereby bridging the gap between research, policy and practice.

Factors affecting engagement between academic faculty and decision-makers: learnings and priorities for a school of public health

Background

Schools of public health (SPHs) are increasingly being recognised as important contributors of human, social and intellectual capital relevant to health policy and decision-making. Few studies within the implementation science literature have systematically examined knowledge exchange experiences within this specific organisational context. The purpose of this study was therefore to elicit whether documented facilitators and barriers to engaging with government decision-makers resonates within an academic SPH context. We sought to understand the variations in such experiences at four different levels of government decision-making. Furthermore, we sought to elicit intervention priorities as identified by faculty.

Methods

Between May and December 2016, 211 (34%) of 627 eligible full-time faculty across one SPH in the United States of America participated in a survey on engagement with decision-makers at the city, state, federal and global government levels. Surveys were administered face-to-face or via Skype. Descriptive data as well as tests of association and logistic regression analyses were conducted using STATA.

Results

Over three-quarters of respondents identified colleagues with ties to decision-makers, institutional affiliation and conducting policy-relevant research as the highest facilitators. Several identified time constraints, academic incentives and financial support as important contributors to engagement. Faculty characteristics, such as research areas of expertise, career track and faculty rank, were found to be statistically significantly associated with facilitators. The top three intervention priorities that emerged were (1) creating incentives for engagement, (2) providing funding for engagement and (3) inculcating an institutional culture around engagement.

Conclusions

The data suggest that five principal categories of factors – individual characteristics, institutional environment, relational dynamics, research focus and funder policies – affect the willingness and ability of academic faculty to engage with government decision-makers. This study suggests that SPHs could enhance the relevance of their role in health policy decision-making by (1) periodically measuring engagement with decision-makers; (2) enhancing individual capacity in knowledge translation and communication, taking faculty characteristics into account; (3) institutionalising a culture that supports policies and practices for engagement in decision-making processes; and (4) creating a strategy to expand and nurture trusted, relevant networks and relationships with decision-makers.

Infusing Science into Politics and Policy: The Importance of Legislators as an Audience in Mental Health Policy Dissemination Research

Legislators (i.e., elected Senators and House Representatives at the federal- and state-level) are a critically important dissemination audience because they shape the architecture of the US mental health system through budgetary and regulatory decisions. In this Point of View, we argue that legislators are a neglected audience in mental health dissemination research. We synthesize relevant research, discuss its potential implications for dissemination efforts, identify challenges, and outline areas for future study.

Imagining the "open" university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education

Open scholarship, such as the sharing of articles, code, data, and educational resources, has the potential to improve university research and education as well as increase the impact universities can have beyond their own walls. To support this perspective, I present evidence from case studies, published literature, and personal experiences as a practicing open scholar. I describe some of the challenges inherent to practicing open scholarship and some of the tensions created by incompatibilities between institutional policies and personal practice. To address this, I propose several concrete actions universities could take to support open scholarship and outline ways in which such initiatives could benefit the public as well as institutions. Importantly, I do not think most of these actions would require new funding but rather a redistribution of existing funds and a rewriting of internal policies to better align with university missions of knowledge dissemination and societal impact.

Uses of Population Health Rankings in Local Policy Contexts: A Multisite Case Study

Population health rankings are a common strategy to spur evidence-informed health policy making, but little is known about their uses or impacts. The study aims were to (1) understand how and why the County Health Rankings (CH-Rankings) are used in local policy contexts, (2) identify factors that influence CH-Rankings utilization, and (3) explore potentially negative impacts of the CH-Rankings. Forty-four interviews were conducted with health organization officials and public policy makers in 15 purposively selected counties. The CH-Rankings were used instrumentally to inform internal planning decisions, conceptually to educate the public and policy makers about determinants of population health, and politically to advance organizational agendas. Factors related to organizational capacity, county political ideology, and county rank influenced if, how, and why the CH-Rankings were used. The CH-Rankings sometimes had the negative impacts of promoting potentially ineffective interventions in politically conservative counties and prompting negative media coverage in some counties with poor rank.

Comparison of Research Framing Preferences and Information Use of State Legislators and Advocates Involved in Cancer Control, United States, 2012-2013

Introduction

Evidence-based policy plays an important role in prevention of cancer and other chronic diseases. The needs of actors involved in policy decision-making should inform knowledge translation strategies. This study examines the differences between state legislators and advocates in how they seek and use information and what their preferences are for how research information is framed.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional comparison of survey responses by US advocates (n = 77) and state legislators (n = 265) working on issues related to cancer control.

Results

Advocates differed significantly from legislators on all demographic characteristics. Advocates reported seeking and using information more frequently than legislators, though legislators used legislative research bureaus more often (0.45 point difference, P = .004). Both legislators and advocates prioritized the presentation and timeliness of research information similarly but reported different preferences for source (information bias, information relevance, delivery of information by trusted person) of research information. Several differences between advocates and legislators were modified by participant age.

Conclusion

Our study provides insights for development of knowledge translation strategies to enhance evidence-based policy making for cancer control that are tailored to state-level legislators and advocates. Additional research efforts should evaluate the effectiveness of such knowledge translation strategies, particularly among advocates.

Infographics And Public Policy: Using Data Visualization To Convey Complex Information

Data visualization combines principles from psychology, usability, graphic design, and statistics to highlight important data in accessible and appealing formats. Doing so helps bridge knowledge producers with knowledge users, who are often inundated with information and increasingly pressed for time.

State legislators' sources and use of information: bridging the gap between research and policy

Research can inform policymakers of public health issues and shape policy decisions, hopefully benefiting public health; thus, improving dissemination of research to policymakers is important for developing effective public health policies that improve health and health equity. However, the utilization of research among policymakers is often not fully realized. This study builds upon current knowledge about what types of information legislators seek when working on health issues and where they go for information. Further, it explores what kinds of information legislators find most helpful and if there are ways researchers could better provide this evidence. Key-informant interviews were conducted with 25 U.S. state legislators holding health committee leadership positions between July and November, 2010. Regarding types of information sought, most legislators discussed their desire for data and statistics when working on health-related issues. When asked about their most trusted sources of information, participants mentioned government sources as well as advocacy, lobby and industry groups. A few mentioned universities and healthcare professionals. Results from this study offer public health researchers and practitioners' insights into the types of information that may be most helpful to policymakers. Insights gathered may improve the dissemination of research and bridge the gap between knowledge users and knowledge producers.

Networking to Improve Nutrition Policy Research

Effective nutrition and obesity policies that improve the food environments in which Americans live, work, and play can have positive effects on the quality of human diets. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Nutrition and Obesity Policy Research and Evaluation Network (NOPREN) conducts transdisciplinary practice-based policy research and evaluation to foster understanding of the effectiveness of nutrition policies. The articles in this special collection bring to light a set of policies that are being used across the United States. They add to the larger picture of policies that can work together over time to improve diet and health.