Use of research evidence in state policymaking for childhood obesity prevention in Minnesota.

OBJECTIVES: We describe how scientific evidence about obesity has been used in Minnesota legislative materials to understand how research evidence might more effectively be translated into policymaking. METHODS: We selected 13 obesity-related bills introduced from 2007 to 2011 in Minnesota. Using state archives, we collected all legislative committee meeting materials and floor testimony related to each bill. We used a coding instrument to systematically analyze the content of a sample of 109 materials for their use of research evidence and non-research-based information. RESULTS: Research evidence was mentioned in 41% of all legislative materials. Evidence was often used to describe the prevalence or consequences of obesity or policy impacts but not to describe health disparities. In 45% of materials that cited evidence, no source of evidence was indicated. By contrast, 92% of materials presented non-research-based information, such as expert beliefs, constituent opinion, political principles, and anecdotes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an abundance of available research evidence on obesity, less than half of legislative materials cited any such evidence in discussions around obesity-related bills under consideration in Minnesota.

Uses of research evidence in the state legislative process to promote active environments in Minnesota.

PURPOSE: To describe how research evidence and non-research-based information are used in testimony and other legislative documents used in arguments for and against physical activity-related bills in Minnesota. DESIGN: Content analysis. SETTING: Documents and oral testimony archived by the Minnesota State Legislature from 2007 to 2011. SUBJECTS: Not applicable. MEASURES: A coding instrument was developed to measure descriptive features of materials (e.g., length, document type) and the presence or absence of certain types of research evidence and non-research-based information. ANALYSIS: Frequencies of variables and measures of associations using Pearson χ (2) tests. RESULTS: Over a third (36%) of the sample contained research evidence, and 88% of the sample contained non-research-based information. Compared to materials related to physical activity, materials related to built environment were significantly less likely to reference research evidence. CONCLUSION: Despite an abundance of evidence, research evidence was present in only about one-third of the sample. There may be opportunities during legislative discussions on the built environment for obesity-related data to help make the case for sound policies.