Enhancing the Quality of Prevention Research Supported by the National Institutes of Health.

As the nation's premier biomedical research agency, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has supported most of the research that underlies the prevention services that are provided to citizens in the United States and around the world. Within the NIH, the Office of Disease Prevention (ODP) has as its mission to improve the public health by increasing the scope, quality, dissemination, and effect of prevention research supported by the NIH. In today's environment, the ODP needs to focus its efforts to address this mission. To do so, the ODP has developed a strategic plan for 2014 to 2018. We provide background on the ODP and key points from the strategic plan.

Independent state health surveys: responding to the need for local population health data.

CONTEXT: There is high demand for local-level population health data. A national system of state and local data collection would help improve both population health and health care delivery. The primary source of state-level population health data for adults is the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. However, many states need data on children and adolescents, racial and ethnic subpopulations, consistent estimates for localities, or more in-depth information on key topics than the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System provides. Eleven state health surveys (SHSs) have emerged in an effort to address these gaps. DESIGN: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted in 2009 with representatives of 9 SHSs. The interviews were recorded, and data were transcribed, organized, and analyzed according to the query structure. This analysis identified (1) the core elements of SHS that have been successful in meeting needs for local data and (2) the processes and strategies used by state officials in creating these surveys. RESULTS: Key findings include the following: (1) SHSs provide concrete data on local health issues that meet the needs of policy makers who wish to adopt evidence-based public health policies; (2) data from SHSs allow researchers to identify issues, apply for grants, and evaluate, assess, and track health indicators; (3) a "champion" is required to build the case for a survey and push through barriers to obtain funding and stakeholder buy-in; and (4) SHSs face challenges such as inconsistent funding and lack of uniform standards. CONCLUSION: Opportunities to support SHSs include (1) identifying sustained funding sources; (2) providing technical assistance and facilitating training to foster best practices, quality standards, and comparability across states; and (3) supporting an organization for SHS researchers to share resources, information, and experiences.

States' use of local population health data: comparing the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and independent state health surveys.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and compare key features of independent comprehensive state health surveys (SHS) with those of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) for addressing the need for statewide and local population health data. METHODS: We developed inclusion criteria, systematically collected information about federal and SHS that met these criteria, and obtained supplemental information from SHS leaders. RESULTS: We identified comprehensive independent SHS in 11 states and BRFSS surveys in all 50 states. The independent SHS meet important statewide and local data needs, filling 3 key health data gaps in the BRFSS: lack of adequate data on special populations such as children, lack of data on specific localities, and limited depth and scope of health topics surveyed on key issues such as health insurance coverage. Unlike BRFSS, independent SHS have limited comparability with each other. CONCLUSIONS: The BRFSS and independent SHS each meet some key state and local data needs but result in data gaps and inefficient use of resources. Surveys could more effectively and efficiently meet future needs for comparable data to monitor health care reform and address health disparities if they were coordinated across states and at the national, state, and local levels.

Current practice of cesarean delivery on maternal request following the 2006 state-of-the-science conference.

OBJECTIVE: To determine obstetrician-gynecologists' practice patterns of cesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR) following the 2006 National Institutes of Health (NIH) State-of-the-Science conference on this topic, and compare them with those in their practice prior to the conference. STUDY DESIGN: Questionnaires were mailed to 612 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists fellows who participated in a 2006 preconference survey, with 59% responding. The survey assessed demographic characteristics, practice, attitudes, knowledge regarding potential risks and benefits, counseling practices, and department policies with regards to CDMR. RESULTS: The majority of obstetrician-gynecologists in our sample continues to believe that a woman has the right to CDMR, but fewer than in 2006 would agree to perform this procedure. In general, obstetrician-gynecologists associate more risks and fewer benefits with CDMR than in 2006. CONCLUSION: Some physicians have shifted their perception of CDMR risks and benefits since the NIH State-of-the-Science conference; however, practice patterns have not changed significantly.

Cesarean delivery on maternal request: obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge, perception, and practice patterns.

OBJECTIVE: To examine obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge, opinions, and practice patterns related to cesarean delivery on maternal request. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to 1,031 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Fellows in February 2006, with a response rate of 68%. The questionnaire queried respondents' demographic characteristics, practices and attitudes surrounding vaginal and cesarean deliveries, knowledge and beliefs regarding the risks and benefits of elective and nonelective cesarean delivery, and counseling practices and department policies for cesarean delivery on maternal request. RESULTS: About half of respondents believe women have the right to cesarean delivery on maternal request, and a similar percentage acknowledge having performed at least one cesarean delivery on maternal request. Fifty-eight percent of respondents note an increase in patient inquiries regarding cesarean delivery over the past year, yet most of their practices do not have a policy regarding this procedure. Respondents attribute the increase in inquiries to the increase of information from the media and to convenience. Respondents cited more risks than benefits of cesarean delivery on maternal request, and nearly all discuss these risks with patients who are considering one. Females were more negative toward cesarean delivery on maternal request than males and endorsed more risks and fewer benefits. There were no relationships between assessment of risks and benefits or practice with clinician age or patient characteristics. CONCLUSION: Most obstetrician-gynecologists in this study recognized an increased demand for cesarean delivery on maternal request within their practices, while believing that the risks of this procedure outweigh the benefits. Clinicians would benefit from strong evidence regarding risks and benefits, evidence that is crucial to guiding policy making with regard to cesarean delivery on maternal request. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A systematic review of evaluation in formal continuing medical education.

INTRODUCTION: Physicians spend a considerable amount of time in Continuing Medical Education (CME) to maintain their medical licenses. CME evaluation studies vary greatly in evaluation methods, levels of evaluation, and length of follow-up. Standards for CME evaluation are needed to enable comparison among different studies and to detect factors influencing CME evaluation. METHODS: A review of the CME evaluation literature was conducted on primary research studies published from January 2000 to January 2006. Studies assessing only satisfaction with CME were excluded, as were studies where fewer than 50% of the participants were practicing physicians. Thirty-two studies were included in the analyses. Determinations were made about evaluation methods, outcome measures, and follow-up assessment. RESULTS: Only 2 of 32 reviewed studies addressed all evaluation levels: physician changes in knowledge and attitudes (level 2), practices (level 3), and improved patient health status (level 4). None of the studies using self-developed instruments (n = 10) provided reliability and validity information. Only 6 studies used validated scales. Twenty studies had a follow-up period of 6 months or less, and 11 had a follow-up period between 1 and 2 years. DISCUSSION: A gold standard for evaluating the effectiveness of CME would include assessment of all 4 levels of evaluation. A valid, reliable, and adaptable CME evaluation questionnaire addressing variables in the second level is needed to allow comparison of effectiveness across CME interventions. A minimum 1-year postintervention follow-up period may also be indicated to investigate the sustainability of intervention outcomes.

Enhancing Coordination Among the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and National Institutes of Health.

This paper focuses on the relationships among the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF); Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); and NIH. After a brief description of the Task Force, AHRQ, NIH, and an example of how they interact, we describe the steps that have been taken recently by NIH to enhance their coordination. We also discuss several challenges that remain and consider potential remedies that NIH, AHRQ, and investigators can take to provide the USPSTF with the data it needs to make recommendations, particularly those pertaining to behavioral interventions.

The development of a theory-based instrument to evaluate the effectiveness of continuing medical education.

PURPOSE: To determine the psychometric properties of a theoretically based continuing medical education (CME) evaluation instrument examining attitudinal determinants of physicians' changes in medical practices after a CME intervention. The instrument's scales represented constructs from the theory of planned behavior. METHOD: The authors based the template instrument on educational objectives of the CME intervention and adapted it to the clinical domain of preoperative breast cancer therapy. Development of the initial survey involved cognitive testing, pilot tests, and expert reviews. The authors asked 269 clinicians to complete the 35-item instrument before the CME intervention. Factor analysis and item analysis guided the development of the final six subscales: positive behavioral beliefs, negative behavioral beliefs, attitude toward the behavior, perceived behavior control (self-efficacy), subjective norms, and behavioral intention. RESULTS: Cognitive testing and pilot tests ensured the accuracy and clarity of the language and a reasonable survey length. Of the 269 clinicians, 168 (134 physicians) responded. Scales clustered according to the theoretical constructs. Items not loading in any subscales were eliminated. The final 25 items loaded on six subscales with loadings >0.54. Reliability for the subscales ranged from 0.73 to 0.93 (good for the scale development stage). The authors revised the instrument template and protocol after this initial study to increase the possibility of use in future CME evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: The levels of content and construct validity and reliability of the CME evaluation instrument are acceptable for evaluation of CME activities targeting physicians. Instruments adapted from this template could potentially evaluate future CME activities.

Impact of the National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Program on stimulating National Institutes of Health-funded research, 1998 to 2001.

OBJECTIVES: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Development Conference (CDC) was instituted to provide evidence-based guidance on controversial medical issues to researchers, health practitioners, and the public; however, the degree of impact this activity has on stimulating relevant research is unclear. This study examines the impact of CDC statements on the initiation of related NIH-funded research projects. METHODS: Six CDCs from 1998 to 2001 were examined. Research initiatives related to the Conferences' topics were collected through two discrete methods: (i) the overall number of relevant pre- and postconference research activities was compiled using NIH's Information for Management, Planning, Analysis, and Coordination II (IMPAC II) and the Department of Health and Human Services' (DHHS) Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects (CRISP) grant application and award databases; (ii) for each CDC, the sponsoring institute's conference coordinator and other identified Program Directors were queried for their knowledge of new conference-specific research initiatives sponsored by their institute. The main outcome measure was the total number of requests for applications, requests for proposals, program announcements, broad agency announcements, notices, and funded investigator-initiated research program grants (RO1s) for a given Consensus topic in the 3 years before (baseline measure) and following (measure of impact) a CDC. RESULTS: As identified through NIH's IMPAC II and DHHS' CRISP grants and announcements databases, the total number of relevant postconference research initiatives increased for five of six CDCs when compared with baseline activity levels; research activities remained constant for the sixth. When inclusion criteria were restricted to institute-identified research initiatives, two of six CDC topics had overall increases in relevant research activity in the postconference period. CONCLUSIONS: CDCs appear to have a positive impact on the stimulation of related NIH-funded research initiatives. Future outcomes evaluations using prospective data collection methods and more robust participation by sponsoring and cosponsoring institutes should strengthen the reliability of the association between new research initiatives on a given topic and their causal relationship to a given CDC.