Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Framing research for state policymakers who place a priority on cancer

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the potential for reducing the cancer burden via state policy change, few data exist on how best to disseminate research information to influence state legislators’ policy choices. We explored: (1) the relative importance of core framing issues (source, presentation, timeliness) among policymakers who prioritize cancer and those who do not prioritize cancer and (2) the predictors of use of research in policymaking.

Methods

Cross-sectional data were collected from US state policymakers (i.e., legislators elected to state houses or senates) from January through October 2012 (n = 862). One-way analysis of variance was performed to investigate the association of the priority of cancer variable with outcome variables. Multivariate logistic regression models examined predictors of the influence of research information.

Results

Legislators who prioritized cancer tended to rate characteristics that make research information useful higher than those who did not prioritize cancer. Among differences that were statistically significant were three items in the “source” domain (relevance, delivered by someone respected, supports one’s own position), one item in the “presentation” domain (telling a story related to constituents) and two items in the “timeliness” domain (high current state priority, feasible when information is received). Participants who prioritized cancer risk factors were 80 % more likely to rate research information as one of their top reasons for choosing an issue on which to work.

Conclusions

Our results suggest the importance of narrative forms of communication and that research information needs to be relevant to the policymakers’ constituents in a brief, concise format.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Colditz GA, Samplin-Salgado M, Ryan CT, Dart H, Fisher L, Tokuda A, Rockhill B (2002) Harvard report on cancer prevention, volume 5: fulfilling the potential for cancer prevention: policy approaches. Cancer Causes Control 13(3):199–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Selig WK, Jenkins KL, Reynolds SL, Benson D, Daven M (2005) Examining advocacy and comprehensive cancer control. Cancer Causes Control 16(Suppl 1):61–68. doi:10.1007/s10552-005-0485-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Steger C, Daniel K, Gurian GL, Petherick JT, Stockmyer C, David AM, Miller SE (2010) Public policy action and CCC implementation: benefits and hurdles. Cancer Causes Control 21(12):2041–2048. doi:10.1007/s10552-010-9668-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. McGinnis JM, Williams-Russo P, Knickman JR (2002) The case for more active policy attention to health promotion. Health Aff (Millwood) 21(2):78–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chriqui JF, O’Connor JC, Chaloupka FJ (2011) What gets measured, gets changed: evaluating law and policy for maximum impact. J Law Med Ethics 39(Suppl 1):21–26. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00559.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kerner JF, Guirguis-Blake J, Hennessy KD, Brounstein PJ, Vinson C, Schwartz RH, Myers BA, Briss P (2005) Translating research into improved outcomes in comprehensive cancer control. Cancer Causes Control 16(Suppl 1):27–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kerner J, Tajima K, Yip CH, Bhattacharyya O, Trapido E, Cazap E, Ullrich A, Fernandez M, Qiao YL, Kim P, Cho J, Sutcliffe C, Sutcliffe S (2012) Knowledge exchange–translating research into practice and policy. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 13(4 Suppl):37–48

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nykiforuk CI, Wild TC, Raine KD (2014) Cancer beliefs and prevention policies: comparing Canadian decision-maker and general population views. Cancer Causes Control 25(12):1683–1696. doi:10.1007/s10552-014-0474-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Colditz GA, Gortmaker SL (1995) Cancer prevention strategies for the future: risk identification and preventive intervention. Milbank Q 73(4):621–651

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Grunfeld E, Zitzelsberger L, Evans WK, Cameron R, Hayter C, Berman N, Stern H (2004) Better knowledge translation for effective cancer control: a priority for action. Cancer Causes Control 15(5):503–510. doi:10.1023/B:CACO.0000036448.40295.1d

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Brownson RC, Haire-Joshu D, Luke DA (2006) Shaping the context of health: a review of environmental and policy approaches in the prevention of chronic diseases. Annu Rev Public Heal 27:341–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Frieden TR, Myers JE, Krauskopf MS, Farley TA (2008) A public health approach to winning the war against cancer. Oncologist 13(12):1306–1313. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2008-0157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Task Force on Community Preventive Services (2015) Guide to Community Preventive Services. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. www.thecommunityguide.org. Accessed 15 Nov 2015

  14. National Cancer Institute (2015) Cancer Control Continuum. National Cancer Institute, US National Institutes of Health. http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/od/continuum.html. Accessed 15 Nov 2015

  15. McGowan A, Brownson R, Wilcox L, Mensah G (2006) Prevention and control of chronic diseases. In: Goodman R, Rothstein M, Hoffman R, Lopez W, Matthews G (eds) Law in public health practice, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Eyler A, Chriqui J, Moreland-Russell S, Brownson R (eds) (2016) Prevention, policy, and public health. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. CDC (1994) State cancer registries: status of authorizing legislation and enabling regulations–United States, October 1993. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 43(4):71–75

    Google Scholar 

  18. Izquierdo JN, Schoenbach VJ (2000) The potential and limitations of data from population-based state cancer registries. Am J Public Heal 90(5):695–698

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Black BL, Cowens-Alvarado R, Gershman S, Weir HK (2005) Using data to motivate action: the need for high quality, an effective presentation, and an action context for decision-making. Cancer Causes Control 16(Suppl 1):15–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lightwood J, Glantz SA (2013) The effect of the California tobacco control program on smoking prevalence, cigarette consumption, and healthcare costs: 1989-2008. PLoS ONE 8(2):e47145. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Cokkinides V, Bandi P, Shah M, Virgo K, Ward E (2011) The association between state mandates of colorectal cancer screening coverage and colorectal cancer screening utilization among US adults aged 50 to 64 years with health insurance. BMC Heal Serv Res 11:19. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-11-19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Akl EA, Oxman AD, Herrin J, Vist GE, Terrenato I, Sperati F, Costiniuk C, Blank D, Schunemann H (2011) Framing of health information messages. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (12):CD006777. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006777.pub2

  23. Brownson RC, Chriqui JF, Stamatakis KA (2009) Understanding evidence-based public health policy. Am J Public Heal 99(9):1576–1583. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.156224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jones E, Kreuter M, Pritchett S, Matulionis RM, Hann N (2006) State health policy makers: what’s the message and who’s listening? Heal Promot Pract 7(3):280–286. doi:10.1177/1524839906289583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rothman AJ, Salovey P (1997) Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: the role of message framing. Psychol Bull 121(1):3–19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Brownson RC, Dodson EA, Stamatakis KA, Casey CM, Elliott MB, Luke DA, Wintrode CG, Kreuter MW (2011) Communicating evidence-based information on cancer prevention to state-level policy makers. J Natl Cancer Inst 103(4):306–316. doi:10.1093/jnci/djq529

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Fox D (2010) The convergence of science and governance: research, health policy, and American states. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kingdon JW (2010) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Updated 2nd edn. Longman, Boston

  29. McDonough J (2000) Experiencing politics. A legislator’s stories of government and health care. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dodson EA, Stamatakis KA, Chalifour S, Haire-Joshu D, McBride T, Brownson RC (2012) State legislators’ work on public health-related issues: what influences priorities? J Public Heal Manag Pract 19(1):25–29. doi:10.1097/PHH.0b013e318246475c

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Bogenschneider K, Coorbett T (2010) Evidence-based policymaking: insights from policy-minded researchers and research-minded policy makers. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, McLeod CB, Abelson J (2003) How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? Milbank Q 81(2):221–248

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Choi BC, Li L, Lu Y, Zhang LR, Zhu Y, Pak AW, Chen Y, Little J (2016) Bridging the gap between science and policy: an international survey of scientists and policy makers in China and Canada. Implement Sci 11(1):16. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0377-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Bogenschneider K, Little O, Johnson K (2013) Policymakers’ use of social science research: looking within and across policy actors. J Marriage Fam 75(2):263–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Moreland-Russell S, Barbero C, Andersen S, Geary N, Dodson EA, Brownson RC (2015) “Hearing from all sides” How legislative testimony influences state level policy-makers in the United States. Int J Heal Policy Manag 4(2):91–98. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Davis JR, Kern TG, Perry MC, Brownson RC, Harmon RG (1989) Survey of cancer control attitudes among Missouri state legislators. Mo Med 86(2):95–98

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J (2014) A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Heal Serv Res 14:2. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Brownson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD (2006) Researchers and policymakers: travelers in parallel universes. Am J Prev Med 30(2):164–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Green M (2006) Narratives and cancer communication. J Commun 56:S163–S183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Hinyard LJ, Kreuter MW (2007) Using narrative communication as a tool for health behavior change: a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical overview. Heal Educ Behav 34(5):777–792. doi:10.1177/1090198106291963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Stamatakis K, McBride T, Brownson R (2010) Communicating prevention messages to policy makers: the role of stories in promoting physical activity. J Phys Act Heal 7(Suppl 1):S00–S107

    Google Scholar 

  42. Dahlstrom MF (2014) Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proc Natl Acad Sci US A 111(Suppl 4):13614–13620. doi:10.1073/pnas.1320645111

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Dodson EA, Geary NA, Brownson RC (2015) State legislators’ sources and use of information: bridging the gap between research and policy. Heal Educ Res. doi:10.1093/her/cyv044

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kreuter MW, Green MC, Cappella JN, Slater MD, Wise ME, Storey D, Clark EM, O’Keefe DJ, Erwin DO, Holmes K, Hinyard LJ, Houston T, Woolley S (2007) Narrative communication in cancer prevention and control: a framework to guide research and application. Ann Behav Med 33(3):221–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. McDonough JE (2001) Using and misusing anecdote in policy making. Heal Aff (Millwood) 20(1):207–212

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Jewell CJ, Bero LA (2008) “Developing good taste in evidence”: facilitators of and hindrances to evidence-informed health policymaking in state government. Milbank Q 86(2):177–208

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Nelson D, Hesse B, Croyle R (2009) Making data talk. Communicating public health data to the public. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  48. Wallack L, Woodruff K, Dorfman L, Diaz I (1999) News for a change an advocate’s guide to working with the media, vol 3. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  49. Slater MD, Kelly KJ, Thackeray R (2006) Segmentation on a shoestring: health audience segmentation in limited-budget and local social marketing interventions. Heal Promot Pract 7(2):170–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Otten JJ, Cheng K, Drewnowski A (2015) Infographics and public policy: using data visualization to convey complex information. Heal Aff (Millwood) 34(11):1901–1907. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Tabak RG, Eyler AA, Dodson EA, Brownson RC (2015) Accessing evidence to inform public health policy: a study to enhance advocacy. Public Heal 129(6):698–704. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2015.02.016

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Mokdad AH (2009) The behavioral risk factors surveillance system: past, present, and future. Annu Rev Public Heal 30:43–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Jervis KJ (2005) A review of state legislation and a state legislator survey related to not-for-profit hospital tax exemption and health care for the indigent. J Heal Care Finance 32(2):36–71

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sorian R, Baugh T (2002) Power of information: closing the gap between research and policy. When it comes to conveying complex information to busy policy-makers, a picture is truly worth a thousand words. Heal Aff (Millwood) 21(2):264–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the assistance from the National Conference of State Legislatures. This research was funded in part by the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health (Grant Numbers 1R01CA124404-015, R25CA171994-02, and P30 CA09184); the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (Grant Number 1P30DK092950); and Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences (Grant Numbers UL1 TR000448 and KL2 TR000450) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery and Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA

    Ross C. Brownson

  2. Prevention Research Center in St. Louis, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA

    Ross C. Brownson, Elizabeth A. Dodson & Sarah Moreland-Russell

  3. Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Jon F. Kerner

Authors
  1. Ross C. Brownson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth A. Dodson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jon F. Kerner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sarah Moreland-Russell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ross C. Brownson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brownson, R.C., Dodson, E.A., Kerner, J.F. et al. Framing research for state policymakers who place a priority on cancer. Cancer Causes Control 27, 1035–1041 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-016-0771-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-016-0771-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation