Building the Evidence Base for Population-Level Interventions

Abstract

Population-level interventions focused on policy, systems, and environmental change strategies are increasingly being used to affect and improve the health of populations. At the same time, emphasis on implementing evidence-based public health practices and programming is increasing, particularly at the federal level. Valuing strategies in the population health domain without the benefit of demonstrated efficacy through highly rigorous methods introduces an inherent tension between planning and acting on the best evidence available, waiting for more rigorous evidence to emerge, as well as exploring innovative ways to evaluate and model evidence-based strategies. This article describes the creation of a resource that helps public health practitioners use current evidence for strategic decision making while building the evidence base for population-level interventions. The resource addresses topics of current discussion in the field of evaluating population-level interventions, including the tension between internal and external validity, the need to include measures of health equity, and the balance between fidelity to the intervention and adaptation to the community context. The resource is intended to advance development of evidence in the field by providing practitioners, project managers, and evaluators with a practical guide for using, reviewing, and adding to the existing evidence base.

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

“…Although there has been increased investment in PHIR over the last decade, there are challenges that hinder the application of evidence relevant to policy and practice decisions to improve risk of disease at the population level (e.g. action often precedes research, outcomes take a long time to achieve) [ 5 – 7 ]. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) defines knowledge translation as “ a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically-sound application of knowledge to improve the health of Canadians ” [ 8 ] .…”

Researchers Supporting Schools to Improve Health: Influential Factors and Outcomes of Knowledge Brokering in the COMPASS Study

“…A gap between school health research and practice exists, aligning with the observation that public health and educational evidence are not being integrated into practice. This is known as the “knowledge to action gap,” and knowledge translation initiatives have emerged to address this issue . Knowledge translation encompasses various strategies to increase the uptake of research findings into policy and practice; knowledge exchange is one approach, in which researchers and knowledge users (individuals who could use the research to inform policy or practice) discuss research problems and findings .…”

Challenges and Innovations in a Community-Based Participatory Randomized Controlled Trial

“…For example, in terms of external validity, it is essential to understand contextual factors that may affect the success of an intervention for any particular population (Braveman, Egerter, & Williams, 2011; Hawe et al, 2004). Thus, contextual factors relevant to any test of intervention effectiveness should be measured and reported (Lifsey, Cash, Anthony, Mathis, & Silva, 2015).…”