23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Public Health: Reconciling the Pulls of Practice and the Push of Research

      1 , 2 , 3
      Annual Review of Public Health
      Annual Reviews

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Timely implementation of principles of evidence-based public health (EBPH) is critical for bridging the gap between discovery of new knowledge and its application. Public health organizations need sufficient capacity (the availability of resources, structures, and workforce to plan, deliver, and evaluate the preventive dose of an evidence-based intervention) to move science to practice. We review principles of EBPH, the importance of capacity building to advance evidence-based approaches, promising approaches for capacity building, and future areas for research and practice. Although there is general agreement among practitioners and scientists on the importance of EBPH, there is less clarity on the definition of evidence, how to find it, and how, when, and where to use it. Capacity for EBPH is needed among both individuals and organizations. Capacity can be strengthened via training, use of tools, technical assistance, assessment and feedback, peer networking, and incentives. Modest investments in EBPH capacity building will foster more effective public health practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references134

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The value and challenges of participatory research: strengthening its practice.

          The increasing use of participatory research (PR) approaches to address pressing public health issues reflects PR's potential for bridging gaps between research and practice, addressing social and environmental justice and enabling people to gain control over determinants of their health. Our critical review of the PR literature culminates in the development of an integrative practice framework that features five essential domains and provides a structured process for developing and maintaining PR partnerships, designing and implementing PR efforts, and evaluating the intermediate and long-term outcomes of descriptive, etiological, and intervention PR studies. We review the empirical and nonempirical literature in the context of this practice framework to distill the key challenges and added value of PR. Advances to the practice of PR over the next decade will require establishing the effectiveness of PR in achieving health outcomes and linking PR practices, processes, and core elements to health outcomes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: the interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation.

            If we keep on doing what we have been doing, we are going to keep on getting what we have been getting. Concerns about the gap between science and practice are longstanding. There is a need for new approaches to supplement the existing approaches of research to practice models and the evolving community-centered models for bridging this gap. In this article, we present the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation (ISF) that uses aspects of research to practice models and of community-centered models. The framework presents three systems: the Prevention Synthesis and Translation System (which distills information about innovations and translates it into user-friendly formats); the Prevention Support System (which provides training, technical assistance or other support to users in the field); and the Prevention Delivery System (which implements innovations in the world of practice). The framework is intended to be used by different types of stakeholders (e.g., funders, practitioners, researchers) who can use it to see prevention not only through the lens of their own needs and perspectives, but also as a way to better understand the needs of other stakeholders and systems. It provides a heuristic for understanding the needs, barriers, and resources of the different systems, as well as a structure for summarizing existing research and for illuminating priority areas for new research and action.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              National Institutes of Health approaches to dissemination and implementation science: current and future directions.

              To address the vast gap between current knowledge and practice in the area of dissemination and implementation research, we address terminology, provide examples of successful applications of this research, discuss key sources of support, and highlight directions and opportunities for future advances. There is a need for research testing approaches to scaling up and sustaining effective interventions, and we propose that further advances in the field will be achieved by focusing dissemination and implementation research on 5 core values: rigor and relevance, efficiency, collaboration, improved capacity, and cumulative knowledge.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Annual Review of Public Health
                Annu. Rev. Public Health
                Annual Reviews
                0163-7525
                1545-2093
                April 2018
                April 2018
                : 39
                : 1
                : 27-53
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Prevention Research Center in St. Louis, Brown School; Department of Surgery and Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri 63130, USA;
                [2 ]Fielding School of Public Health and Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA;
                [3 ]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, California 94127, USA;
                Article
                10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-014746
                5972383
                29166243
                a7e02412-fa81-4512-a2d5-8905986c46ed
                © 2018

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Sociology,Social policy & Welfare,Political science,Psychology,Development studies,Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article