At the time this work was conducted, Michelle M. Mello was with the Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA. Jennifer Wood was with the Department of Criminal Justice, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. Scott Burris was with Beasley School of Law, Temple University. Alexander C. Wagenaar was with the Department of Health Outcomes and Policy, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville. Jennifer K. Ibrahim was with the Department of Public Health, College of Health Professions and Social Work, Temple University. Jeffrey W. Swanson was with the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Am J Public Health. 2013 Nov;103(11):1979-88. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301281. Epub 2013 Sep 12.
Although legal interventions are responsible for many sentinel public health achievements, law is underutilized as a tool for advancing population health. Our purpose was to identify critical opportunities for public health lawmaking. We articulated key criteria and illustrated their use with 5 examples. These opportunities involve significant health problems that are potentially amenable to change through law and for which an effective legal intervention is available: optimizing graduated driver licensing laws, increasing tax rates on alcoholic beverages, regulating sodium in foods, enacting laws to facilitate reversal of opioid overdoses, and improving mental health interventions in the college setting. We call for a national conversation about critical opportunities for public health law to advance evidence-based policymaking.
虽然法律干预措施在许多重大公共卫生成就中发挥了作用，但法律作为推进人口健康的工具还未得到充分利用。我们的目的是确定公共卫生立法的关键机会。我们阐述了关键标准，并通过 5 个例子说明了其用法。这些机会涉及到严重的健康问题，这些问题有可能通过法律加以改变，并且可以采取有效的法律干预措施：优化驾驶员分级许可法、提高酒精饮料税率、控制食品中的钠含量、制定法律以方便逆转阿片类药物过量、改善大学校园的心理健康干预措施。我们呼吁开展全国性对话，探讨利用公共卫生法推进循证决策的关键机会。
