Distilling the Fundamentals of Evidence-Based Public Health Policy.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Public Health Reports Pub Date : 2024-06-24 DOI:10.1177/00333549241256751
Megan A Kelly, Richard W Puddy, Sameer M Siddiqi, Christopher Nelson, Alexandra H Ntazinda, James E Kucik, Diane Hall, Christian T Murray, Andrada Tomoaia-Cotisel
{"title":"Distilling the Fundamentals of Evidence-Based Public Health Policy.","authors":"Megan A Kelly, Richard W Puddy, Sameer M Siddiqi, Christopher Nelson, Alexandra H Ntazinda, James E Kucik, Diane Hall, Christian T Murray, Andrada Tomoaia-Cotisel","doi":"10.1177/00333549241256751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Public health policy interventions are associated with many important public health achievements. To provide public health practitioners and decision makers with practical approaches for examining and employing evidence-based public health (EBPH) policy interventions, we describe the characteristics and benefits that distinguish EBPH policy interventions from programmatic interventions. These characteristics include focusing on health at a population level, focusing on upstream drivers of health, and involving less individual action than programmatic interventions. The benefits of EBPH policy interventions include more sustained effects on health than many programs and an enhanced ability to address health inequities. Early childhood education and universal preschool provide a case example that illustrates the distinction between EBPH policy and programmatic interventions. This review serves as the foundation for 3 concepts that support the effective use of public health policy interventions: applying core component thinking to understand the population health effects of EBPH policy interventions; understanding the influence of existing policies, policy supports, and the context in which a particular policy is implemented on the effectiveness of that policy; and employing a systems thinking approach to identify leverage points where policy implementation can have a meaningful effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":20793,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Reports","volume":" ","pages":"333549241256751"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11569633/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549241256751","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public health policy interventions are associated with many important public health achievements. To provide public health practitioners and decision makers with practical approaches for examining and employing evidence-based public health (EBPH) policy interventions, we describe the characteristics and benefits that distinguish EBPH policy interventions from programmatic interventions. These characteristics include focusing on health at a population level, focusing on upstream drivers of health, and involving less individual action than programmatic interventions. The benefits of EBPH policy interventions include more sustained effects on health than many programs and an enhanced ability to address health inequities. Early childhood education and universal preschool provide a case example that illustrates the distinction between EBPH policy and programmatic interventions. This review serves as the foundation for 3 concepts that support the effective use of public health policy interventions: applying core component thinking to understand the population health effects of EBPH policy interventions; understanding the influence of existing policies, policy supports, and the context in which a particular policy is implemented on the effectiveness of that policy; and employing a systems thinking approach to identify leverage points where policy implementation can have a meaningful effect.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
提炼以证据为基础的公共卫生政策的基本要素。
公共卫生政策干预与许多重要的公共卫生成就有关。为了向公共卫生从业人员和决策者提供实用的方法来检查和采用循证公共卫生(EBPH)政策干预,我们描述了 EBPH 政策干预不同于计划干预的特点和益处。这些特点包括关注人口层面的健康、关注健康的上游驱动因素,以及与计划性干预相比较少涉及个人行动。与许多计划相比,EBPH 政策干预的好处包括对健康的影响更持久,解决健康不平等问题的能力更强。幼儿教育和普及学前教育提供了一个案例,说明了 EBPH 政策干预与计划干预之间的区别。本综述为支持有效使用公共卫生政策干预的 3 个概念奠定了基础:运用核心要素思维来理解 EBPH 政策干预对人口健康的影响;理解现有政策、政策支持以及特定政策的实施环境对该政策有效性的影响;运用系统思维方法来确定政策实施可产生有意义影响的杠杆点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Public Health Reports
Public Health Reports 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
6.10%
发文量
164
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Health Reports is the official journal of the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General and the U.S. Public Health Service and has been published since 1878. It is published bimonthly, plus supplement issues, through an official agreement with the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes original research and commentaries in the areas of public health practice and methodology, original research, public health law, and public health schools and teaching. Issues contain regular commentaries by the U.S. Surgeon General and executives of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health. The journal focuses upon such topics as tobacco control, teenage violence, occupational disease and injury, immunization, drug policy, lead screening, health disparities, and many other key and emerging public health issues. In addition to the six regular issues, PHR produces supplemental issues approximately 2-5 times per year which focus on specific topics that are of particular interest to our readership. The journal''s contributors are on the front line of public health and they present their work in a readable and accessible format.
期刊最新文献
Addressing Polarizing Issues in Public Health: Ten Principles for Effective Dialog. Perspectives of Parents, School Nurses, and Pediatricians on Vaccine Hesitancy in St Louis County, Missouri. COVID-19, Stay-at-Home Orders, and Interpersonal Violence: Findings and Implications for Emergency Response Efforts. Overdose Deaths and Cross-sector Collaboration. Evolution of Master of Public Health Core Curriculum: Trends and Insights.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1