Research-to-Policy Collaboration for Addiction Prevention

Overseen By Jennifer T Scott, Ph.D

Age: Any Age

Sex: Any

Trial Phase: Academic

Sponsor: Penn State University

Disqualifiers: Not a state-level public official

No Placebo Group All trial participants will receive the active study treatment (no placebo)

Compensation: Varies

Number of Visits: Unknown

300 Participants Needed

Trial Summary

What is the purpose of this trial?

If science is to inform effective substance misuse prevention policy and ultimately improve public health, the field needs an effective strategy for directly supporting policymakers' use of research evidence, yet our field lacks an evidence-based model designed for this purpose. Accordingly, a state-level randomized controlled trial (N = 30 states) of a formal, theory-based approach for appropriately supporting policymakers' use of scientific evidence--known as the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model is proposed. This work has the potential to reduce population-level substance misuse by improving the use of scientific information in policymaking, thus increasing the availability of evidence-based prevention programs and policies.

Will I have to stop taking my current medications?

The trial does not specify whether participants need to stop taking their current medications.

What data supports the effectiveness of the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model treatment for addiction prevention?

The effectiveness of the RPC Model treatment for addiction prevention is indirectly supported by research on translating addiction studies into practice, which highlights the importance of evidence-based decision support in routine treatment. Additionally, the HEAL Prevention Cooperative's work on implementing effective prevention interventions for opioid misuse suggests that similar collaborative approaches can facilitate the integration of effective prevention strategies into practice. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

How is the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model treatment different from other treatments for addiction prevention?

The Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model is unique because it focuses on translating scientific research into policy by connecting researchers with policymakers to create evidence-based prevention strategies, rather than directly treating addiction itself. This approach aims to influence public policy to prevent addiction on a broader scale, which is different from traditional treatments that focus on individual patients. ^{2 6 7 8 9}

Eligibility Criteria

This trial is for state-level policymakers involved in substance misuse prevention policy. It aims to improve the use of scientific evidence in policymaking, potentially increasing the availability of evidence-based programs and policies.

Inclusion Criteria

State-level public officials

Exclusion Criteria

Anyone who is not a state-level public official

Timeline

Screening

Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial

2-4 weeks

Intervention

Implementation of the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model to support policymakers' use of scientific evidence

6 months

Ongoing engagement with policymakers

Follow-up

Participants are monitored for changes in engagement and use of research evidence in policymaking

6 months

Treatment Details

Interventions

• Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model

Trial Overview The study tests a formal approach called the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) Model against a control group, using a randomized controlled trial with 30 states to see if it effectively supports policymakers' use of research evidence.

Participant Groups

Group I: Intervention Group Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Legislative offices who receive the full Research-to-Policy Model intervention.

Group II: Control Group Active Control 1 Intervention

Legislative Offices who do not receive the full RPC Model intervention.

Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?

Penn State University

Lead Sponsor

Trials

380

Recruited

131,000+

National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

Collaborator

Trials

2,658

Recruited

3,409,000+

Findings from Research

The paper emphasizes the importance of translating research findings from addiction studies into practical applications for treatment programs, which can enhance program outcomes.

It discusses the development of an outcomes management system that utilizes evidence-based decision support to predict patient responses and reduce dropout rates in addiction treatment, highlighting its potential impact on improving treatment effectiveness.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Translating addictions research into evidence-based practice: the Polaris CD outcomes management system. Toche-Manley, L., Grissom, G., Dietzen, L., et al.[2021]

Despite progress in prevention science for tobacco, alcohol, and drug use, significant challenges remain in translating research into effective practice, particularly in ensuring implementation fidelity and adapting programs to fit different contexts.

Future advancements in prevention will depend on collaborative research models that integrate researchers and practitioners in real-world settings to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of prevention programs.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Advancing prevention science and practice: challenges, critical issues, and future directions. Botvin, GJ.[2019]

A new research-practice integration (RPI) model has been developed to enhance the translation of research findings into real-world clinical practices for treating alcoholism and other drug dependencies, emphasizing collaboration among stakeholders like clinicians, patients, and researchers.

The RPI model's effectiveness is demonstrated through a case study involving a managed health care plan that successfully utilized key research findings to improve treatment services for adolescents with alcohol and other drug dependence.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Translating research findings into practice: example of treatment services for adolescents in managed care. Sterling, S., Weisner, C.[2020]

The Society for Prevention Research established comprehensive standards to classify prevention programs and policies as efficacious, effective, or ready for dissemination, ensuring accountability and clarity in the field.

An efficacious intervention must be tested in at least two rigorous trials with defined populations and show consistent positive effects, while an effective intervention must also include practical implementation support and real-world evaluation, indicating its readiness for broader adoption.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Standards of evidence: criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Flay, BR., Biglan, A., Boruch, RF., et al.[2019]

The HEAL Prevention Cooperative (HPC) is focused on implementing and testing effective interventions to prevent opioid misuse among youth and young adults, addressing the urgent need due to rising overdose rates in the USA.

This study will analyze the implementation experiences of nine research projects to identify best practices and adaptable components of prevention interventions, ultimately creating resources to aid in the effective adoption and implementation of these strategies in real-world settings.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Accelerating Solutions for the Overdose Crisis: an Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Protocol for the HEAL Prevention Cooperative. Patel, SV., Cance, JD., Bonar, EE., et al.[2023]

The Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) model effectively bridges the gap between prevention research and legislative action, successfully mobilizing scientists and engaging policymakers to request evidence-based strategies.

Implementing the RPC model costs approximately $3510 per legislative office and can generate evidence requests at an average cost of $444 each, highlighting a cost-effective approach to enhancing the use of scientific evidence in public policy.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Translating Prevention Research for Evidence-Based Policymaking: Results from the Research-to-Policy Collaboration Pilot. Crowley, M., Scott, JTB., Fishbein, D.[2021]

The decade-long partnership between the Prevention Research Center at Penn State and the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency has successfully implemented nearly 200 evidence-based prevention and intervention programs, significantly improving youth outcomes.

The collaboration has led to a more efficient use of system resources, highlighting the importance of research-policy partnerships in enhancing community support and intervention strategies.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A state agency-university partnership for translational research and the dissemination of evidence-based prevention and intervention. Bumbarger, BK., Campbell, EM.[2022]

A survey of 101 Australian researchers revealed a strong preference for a balanced funding approach (50/50) between agency-directed and researcher-initiated addiction research, with a focus on alcohol (32%) and tobacco (18%) as top priorities for research spending.

Researchers identified significant barriers to prevention research, particularly the complexities of design and methodology, and emphasized the need for increased funding, collaboration, and political support to enhance research efforts in this area.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Researchers' views about priorities for research on alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. Walsh, RA., Low, A., Sanson-Fisher, RW.[2005]

Research conducted between 1991 and 2001 by the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre highlighted the growing issue of heroin dependence in Australia, which increased to around 100,000 users by the late 1990s.

The findings from this research contributed to the policy discussions regarding the potential for a controlled trial of heroin prescription, emphasizing the complex relationship between research outcomes and drug policy formulation.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The contribution of research to Australian policy responses to heroin dependence 1990-2001: a personal retrospection. Hall, W.[2007]

References

1. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Translating addictions research into evidence-based practice: the Polaris CD outcomes management system. [2021]

2. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Advancing prevention science and practice: challenges, critical issues, and future directions. [2019]

3. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Translating research findings into practice: example of treatment services for adolescents in managed care. [2020]

4. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Standards of evidence: criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. [2019]

5. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Accelerating Solutions for the Overdose Crisis: an Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Protocol for the HEAL Prevention Cooperative. [2023]

6. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Translating Prevention Research for Evidence-Based Policymaking: Results from the Research-to-Policy Collaboration Pilot. [2021]

7. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A state agency-university partnership for translational research and the dissemination of evidence-based prevention and intervention. [2022]

8. Australia pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Researchers' views about priorities for research on alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. [2005]

9. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The contribution of research to Australian policy responses to heroin dependence 1990-2001: a personal retrospection. [2007]