2012 — 2014 |
Crowley, Daniel Max |
F32Activity Code Description: To provide postdoctoral research training to individuals to broaden their scientific background and extend their potential for research in specified health-related areas. |
Strengthening Benefit-Cost Analyses of Substance Abuse Prevention
DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Substance abuse is estimated to cost the nation over $180 billion annually (French et al., 2008; Harwood, 2004; Mark et al., 2007; Schori, 2011), yet little is known about whether current evidence-based preventive interventions (EBPI) can efficiently reduce these costs (i.e., whether program benefits are greater than the cost of operating the program; Aos et al., 2004, 2011; Heckman et al., 2010). This is largely because researchers lack three components vital to conducting high-quality benefit-costs analyses (BCAs) that reliably estimate the efficiency of substance abuse (SA) prevention efforts (Bukoski et al., 1998; Crowley et al., 2011e; Karoly, 2011; O'Connell et al., 2009). These include a lack of (1) cost estimates that account for the resources needed to adopt, implement and sustain SA prevention programs, (2) estimates of the social benefits gained from reducing SA risk factors in monetary terms, and (3) guidance around best practices and research priorities for evaluating SA prevention costs and benefits. To strengthen BCA practice, the research strategy described in this proposal will estimate and model the systemic costs of a large-scale NIDA-funded SA prevention effort, estimate the societal value of targeting specific SA risk factors, and identify best practices and research priorities for BCAs of SA prevention. Further, this work will provide the foundation for a productive research program as I transition to an independent investigator. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: The proposal is designed to strengthen current BCA practice for evaluating the efficiency of substance abuse prevention efforts. By improving BCAs in this area, researchers can obtain more robust and reliable estimates that can facilitate more informed allocation of social resources and efficient SA prevention efforts. In turn, more efficien substance abuse prevention efforts would allow for the provision of additional services at a lower cost and have the potential to dramatically reduce this major public health problem.
|
0.97 |
2015 — 2019 |
Crowley, Daniel Max Dodge, Kenneth A [⬀] Mcmahon, Robert J. (co-PI) [⬀] |
R01Activity Code Description: To support a discrete, specified, circumscribed project to be performed by the named investigator(s) in an area representing his or her specific interest and competencies. |
Optimizing Prevention of Costly Adult Outcomes
? DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Although prevention scientists have documented effective interventions to prevent adult substance abuse, antisocial behavior, and risky sexual behavior, these interventions have not been applied to optimize return on investment and thus have not yet been fully embraced by communities. This application proposes to map the relations between early risk profiles (and preventive intervention) and adult health and financial outcomes. Past studies have estimated these relations with regression coefficients that satisfy scholars but provide insufficient information to enable practitioners and policy makers to target children for intervention by age and risk profile. The proposed studies will identify the government service outcomes and financial costs associated with various risk profiles by age and the likely return on investment for the Fast Track intervention, which has been documented to prevent antisocial behavior and substance use problems. We propose interviews and administrative data collection at ages 30-34 with participants in each of two ongoing longitudinal studies that have followed children with detailed measurement of risk factors from kindergarten into adulthood, the Child Development Project (n=585, retention=90%) and the Fast Track randomized controlled trial (n=1199, retention=81%). We will pursue three aims: 1) Model the relation between early risk and adult health outcomes at different levels, qualities, and ages of risk, to identify optimal intervention timing and targets; 2) Map the relation between risk profile and adult service utilization and ultimate public costs in adulthood, to monetize the possible returns on prevention investment; and 3) Evaluate the impact of the Fast Track intervention on adult health and financial outcomes, by subgroups. The findings will provide a template for an emerging Science of Investing in Children to improve public health and protect public resources.
|
0.97 |
2017 |
Crowley, Daniel Max |
P50Activity Code Description: To support any part of the full range of research and development from very basic to clinical; may involve ancillary supportive activities such as protracted patient care necessary to the primary research or R&D effort. The spectrum of activities comprises a multidisciplinary attack on a specific disease entity or biomedical problem area. These grants differ from program project grants in that they are usually developed in response to an announcement of the programmatic needs of an Institute or Division and subsequently receive continuous attention from its staff. Centers may also serve as regional or national resources for special research purposes. |
Penn State University's Translational Center For Child Maltreatment Studies Tccms @ Pennsylvania State University-Univ Park
Child maltreatment is a public health crisis that assaults the most vulnerable in our society. Unfortunately, its victims have not fully benefitted from evidence-driven legislative action to the same extent as other serious public health issues (e.g., smoking, obesity). To increase reliance on child maltreatment research for policy and practice, the field requires a national hub to actively: (1) translate scientific findings, (2) engage end-users, and (3) package key messages into high-impact communication products. The Translational Center for Child Maltreatment Studies' Dissemination and Outreach Core (DOC) will develop such models to serve this role, thus incubating solutions to overcome systemic barriers and accelerating dissemination. DOC Aim 1 is to translate research findings produced by TCCMS investigators into scientific leverage for guiding public investments in child protection. This will involve using unprecedented access to multiple administrative record systems to map the fiscal cost of child maltreatment across service systems. Building on this, the DOC will link Project 1's PA Cohort with administrative records to develop models for predicting downstream public costs (e.g., healthcare, crime social service). With this unique data infrastructure, the DOC will be able to evaluate the return-on-investment from strategies to detect, treat, and prevent child maltreatment?including the Clinical Decision Rule (CDR) for Abusive Head Trauma tested in Project 2. This strategic focus on quantifying public and private costs will frame child maltreatment prevention and treatment as not only a key public health issue, but a matter of fiscal responsibility. DOC Aim 2 will employ a Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Model in two powerful demonstration projects: (1) to devise and test workable solutions that will facilitate implementation of new child welfare laws; and (2) to develop data-driven solutions to reduced caseworker turnover. This model will serve as a national resource for the dissemination of evidence-based tools, and will assist the many states similar to PA where massive child welfare reform has occurred without appropriation of essential resources to assist implementation. Finally, DOC Aim 3 will package the scientific leverage and innovative solutions developed in Aims 1 & 2 into communications that resonate deeply with end- users and policy-makers. This will include a policy brief series to provide empirically-driven guidance around detection, treatment, and prevention of child maltreatment. Through this work, the DOC will provide the foundation of the TCCMS Research-to-Policy Bridge and develop a national model for accelerating the dissemination of scientific knowledge and strategies for evidence-based policy and practice.
|
1 |
2018 — 2021 |
Crowley, Daniel Max |
P50Activity Code Description: To support any part of the full range of research and development from very basic to clinical; may involve ancillary supportive activities such as protracted patient care necessary to the primary research or R&D effort. The spectrum of activities comprises a multidisciplinary attack on a specific disease entity or biomedical problem area. These grants differ from program project grants in that they are usually developed in response to an announcement of the programmatic needs of an Institute or Division and subsequently receive continuous attention from its staff. Centers may also serve as regional or national resources for special research purposes. |
Dissemination and Outreach Core @ Pennsylvania State University-Univ Park
Child maltreatment is a public health crisis that assaults the most vulnerable in our society. Unfortunately, its victims have not fully benefitted from evidence-driven legislative action to the same extent as other serious public health issues (e.g., smoking, obesity). To increase reliance on child maltreatment research for policy and practice, the field requires a national hub to actively: (1) translate scientific findings, (2) engage end-users, and (3) package key messages into high-impact communication products. The Translational Center for Child Maltreatment Studies' Dissemination and Outreach Core (DOC) will develop such models to serve this role, thus incubating solutions to overcome systemic barriers and accelerating dissemination. DOC Aim 1 is to translate research findings produced by TCCMS investigators into scientific leverage for guiding public investments in child protection. This will involve using unprecedented access to multiple administrative record systems to map the fiscal cost of child maltreatment across service systems. Building on this, the DOC will link Project 1's PA Cohort with administrative records to develop models for predicting downstream public costs (e.g., healthcare, crime social service). With this unique data infrastructure, the DOC will be able to evaluate the return-on-investment from strategies to detect, treat, and prevent child maltreatment?including the Clinical Decision Rule (CDR) for Abusive Head Trauma tested in Project 2. This strategic focus on quantifying public and private costs will frame child maltreatment prevention and treatment as not only a key public health issue, but a matter of fiscal responsibility. DOC Aim 2 will employ a Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Model in two powerful demonstration projects: (1) to devise and test workable solutions that will facilitate implementation of new child welfare laws; and (2) to develop data-driven solutions to reduced caseworker turnover. This model will serve as a national resource for the dissemination of evidence-based tools, and will assist the many states similar to PA where massive child welfare reform has occurred without appropriation of essential resources to assist implementation. Finally, DOC Aim 3 will package the scientific leverage and innovative solutions developed in Aims 1 & 2 into communications that resonate deeply with end-users and policy-makers. This will include a policy brief series to provide empirically-driven guidance around detection, treatment, and prevention of child maltreatment. Through this work, the DOC will provide the foundation of the TCCMS Research-to-Policy Bridge and develop a national model for accelerating the dissemination of scientific knowledge and strategies for evidence-based policy and practice.
|
1 |
2020 — 2021 |
Crowley, Daniel Long, Elizabeth Scott, Jennifer |
N/AActivity Code Description: No activity code was retrieved: click on the grant title for more information |
Rapid: Testing Science Communication Strategies and Impact Among Policymakers During a National Crisis @ Pennsylvania State Univ University Park
Given the magnitude of the current crisis caused by COVID-19, it has arguably never been more important for scientists to communicate to policymakers their research on virus transmission, prevention, and social and economic consequences that families face. The time sensitive nature of policymakers? acquisition and use of information sources regarding COVID-19 presents a unique opportunity to study effective science communication practices and their impact. This proposal aims to capitalize and expand upon recent successes of a theory-based model, the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC), by: (1) facilitating science communication and dissemination among federal and state policymakers, (2) studying mechanisms for improving science communication strategies and (3) testing the impact of science dissemination efforts and added value of scientist interactions with state and federal policymakers. By getting critical scientific information regarding a current national crisis into the hands of individuals who can act on it, science-based policies may improve the lives of individuals affected by the COVID-19 crisis. We need to identify ways to effectively reach policymakers and inform research communication strategies that can achieve social impact. Scientific information often takes over a decade before it is used in decision making. Effective research dissemination approaches have the potential to shorten that time horizon and improve the societal impact of revolutionary, cutting-edge scientific knowledge.
Study methods involve (1) deploying rapid-cycle randomized controlled trials (RCT) that examine open- and click-rates of emails that disseminate scientific information on COVID-19 to approximately 3,500 federal legislative staff and state legislators and staff who are identified as being assigned to health-related policy issues, and (2) examining the use of research in bill language and public statements (e.g., press releases, social media). Federal legislators will be randomly assigned to three groups: (i) dissemination + interactions, (ii) dissemination only, and (iii) control group. This sampling strategy builds on a current study investigating congressional-researcher interactions facilitated by an active RPC implementation. The proposed study will investigate science dissemination as an add-on component to that interactive approach. State legislators have not been assigned to receive researcher interactions via the active RPC implementation. To increase the reach of time-sensitive information, 75% of state legislators assigned to health-related committees will receive the dissemination and 25% serve as a control group. Observed use of research evidence (URE) will be quantitatively assessed in bill language and public statements, including social media, based on language that was used to validate a URE codebook in prior work. This includes a pre-test period of 1 year prior to US-based responses to COVID-19 (approximately March 1, 2020) and 1-year post-test period following the initial COVID-19 outbreak (March 2021). While the literature illustrates that timeliness and relevance are essential to URE, particularly in times of crisis, studies are needed to examine the impact of science communications and dissemination during such periods of crisis. The proposed work would build the literature base by prospectively assessing the impact of strategies for enhancing evidence use. Importantly, most studies of URE in policymaking have been done retrospectively by asking policymakers to explain how they access research and use it when developing policies. The proposed study will be a substantial asset for the URE field because it will: (1) advance knowledge of what mechanisms are most effective for conveying important and actionable scientific evidence to policymakers at both the federal and state levels and (2) improve our understanding of the impact of real-time science dissemination and interactive approaches.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
|
0.915 |