Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods

Abstract

Acceptability of and public support for prevention are an important part of facilitating policy implementation. This review aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the methods and study designs used to measure and understand public opinion, community attitudes and acceptability of strategies to prevent chronic noncommunicable disease (NCDs) in order to allow for examination of imbalances in methodological approaches and gaps in content areas. We searched four scientific databases (CINAHL, Embase, Ovid/MEDLINE and Scopus) for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between January 2011 and March 2020 in high-income, democratic countries across North America, Europe and the Asia–Pacific region. Studies were included if they focused on opinions, attitudes and acceptability of primary prevention strategies and interventions addressing the key NCD risk factors of alcohol use, unhealthy diet, overweight/obesity, tobacco use and smoking, and physical inactivity. A total of 293 studies were included. Two thirds of studies (n = 194, 66%) used quantitative methods such as cross-sectional studies involving surveys of representative (n = 129, 44%) or convenience (n = 42, 14%) samples. A smaller number of studies used qualitative methods (n = 60, 20%) such as focus groups (n = 21, 7%) and interviews (n = 21, 7%). Thirty-nine studies (13%) used mixed methods such as content analysis of news media (n = 17, 6%). Tobacco control remains the dominant topic of public opinion literature about prevention (n = 124, 42%). Few studies looked solely at physical inactivity (n = 17, 6%). The results of this review suggest that public opinion and acceptability of prevention in the peer-reviewed literature is investigated primarily through cross-sectional surveys. Qualitative and mixed methods may provide more nuanced insights which can be used to facilitate policy implementation of more upstream strategies and policies to prevent NCDs.

Social acceptability of psilocybin-assisted therapy for existential distress at the end of life: A population-based survey

“…As acceptability is high in this study, it may help stakeholders mobilise resources to address barriers and challenges. 16 Since decision-makers and politicians are influenced by public opinion, results may also have a spillover effect on other contexts. 16 The results obtained from this survey are timely in the wake of the growing worldwide interest towards psilocybin-assisted therapy.…”

Sociodemographic characteristics help predict Canadian urbanites’ acceptability of restaurant food environment policies

“…The implementation of FE policies may, however, be a challenging ordeal due to their low public acceptability ( 7 ). From an implementation science perspective, FE policy acceptability (i.e., agreement with the implementation of a FE policy) is of critical importance since policy acceptability will likely facilitate policy implementation and sustainability ( 8 , 9 ). Moreover, citizens with high levels of acceptability for FE policies are more likely to advocate for healthier FE initiatives, which may act as a catalyst for policy implementation ( 10 ).…”

“…The dearth of studies including race and ethnicity variables is especially apparent, as neither of the systematic reviews provide information as to the size and direction of these associations. Only few individual studies have focused on Indigenous populations as well as culturally diverse populations, which have yielded heterogenous findings ( 8 , 9 , 11 , 14 , 17 ). Additionally, whether it be well established sociodemographic correlates of acceptability, like gender and age, or correlates that have been less extensively examined, like race and ethnicity, all sociodemographic-related associations are subject to methodological biases, with certain authors underscoring the utilization of convenience sampling, non-representative samples, and sometimes small sample sizes in the food policy acceptability literature ( 8 , 13 ).…”

“…Only few individual studies have focused on Indigenous populations as well as culturally diverse populations, which have yielded heterogenous findings ( 8 , 9 , 11 , 14 , 17 ). Additionally, whether it be well established sociodemographic correlates of acceptability, like gender and age, or correlates that have been less extensively examined, like race and ethnicity, all sociodemographic-related associations are subject to methodological biases, with certain authors underscoring the utilization of convenience sampling, non-representative samples, and sometimes small sample sizes in the food policy acceptability literature ( 8 , 13 ). Thus, even the links between well-established sociodemographic correlates of food policy acceptability would benefit from being replicated in more representative and larger samples.…”

Gambling, fast food and alcohol sponsorship in elite sport – perspectives from Australian sporting fans

“…These go beyond simply supporting or opposing policy change, and understanding these on a deeper level may be helpful for framing messages and garnering support for public health policy measures [ 43 , 50 ]. Focus groups are an effective means to deeply explore issues and perspectives related to public health policies [ 51 , 52 ], with recent calls to increase qualitative exploration of the acceptability of prevention policies [ 53 ]. Qualitative explorations of support for marketing restrictions in Australia have focused on sponsorship of non-elite sport [ 54 ], television [ 55 ], supermarkets [ 56 ], or broader explorations of government policies for preventive health [ 43 ] or nutrition [ 57 ].…”