Prevention Research Center in St. Louis, Saint Louis University School of Public Health, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Public Health Rep. 2010 Sep-Oct;125(5):736-42. doi: 10.1177/003335491012500516.
Existing knowledge of evidence-based chronic disease prevention is not systematically disseminated or applied. This study investigated state and territorial chronic disease practitioners' self-reported barriers to evidence-based decision making (EBDM).
In a nationwide survey, participants indicated the extent to which they agreed with statements reflecting four personal and five organizational barriers to EBDM. Responses were measured on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating a larger barrier to EBDM. We analyzed mean levels of barriers and calculated adjusted odds ratios for barriers that were considered modifiable through interventions.
Overall, survey participants (n=447) reported higher scores for organizational barriers than for personal barriers. The largest reported barriers to EBDM were lack of incentives/rewards, inadequate funding, a perception of state legislators not supporting evidence-based interventions and policies, and feeling the need to be an expert on many issues. In adjusted models, women were more likely to report a lack of skills in developing evidence-based programs and in communicating with policy makers. Participants with a bachelor's degree as their highest degree were more likely than those with public health master's degrees to report lacking skills in developing evidence-based programs. Men, specialists, and individuals with doctoral degrees were all more likely to feel the need to be an expert on many issues to effectively make evidence-based decisions.
Approaches must be developed to address organizational barriers to EBDM. Focused skills development is needed to address personal barriers, particularly for chronic disease practitioners without graduate-level training.
现有的循证慢性病预防知识并未得到系统传播或应用。本研究调查了州和地区慢性病从业者在循证决策(EBDM)方面自我报告的障碍。
在一项全国性调查中,参与者表示他们在多大程度上同意反映 EBDM 的四个个人和五个组织障碍的陈述。他们的回答是在 0 到 10 的李克特量表上进行衡量的,得分越高表示对 EBDM 的障碍越大。我们分析了障碍的平均水平,并计算了可通过干预措施改变的障碍的调整后比值比。
总体而言,调查参与者(n=447)报告的组织障碍得分高于个人障碍。报告的最大 EBDM 障碍是缺乏激励/奖励、资金不足、认为州立法者不支持基于证据的干预措施和政策,以及感到需要成为许多问题的专家。在调整后的模型中,女性更有可能报告缺乏制定基于证据的计划和与政策制定者沟通的技能。与拥有公共卫生硕士学位的人相比,拥有学士学位作为最高学历的参与者更有可能报告缺乏制定基于证据的计划的技能。男性、专家和拥有博士学位的人都更有可能感到需要成为许多问题的专家,以便有效地做出基于证据的决策。
必须制定方法来解决 EBDM 的组织障碍。需要进行有针对性的技能发展,以解决个人障碍,特别是对于没有研究生培训的慢性病从业者。