Inter-agency collaboration is associated with increased frequency of research use in children's mental health policy making.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the self-report frequency of inter-agency collaboration about children's mental health issues is associated with the self-report frequency of using research evidence in children's mental health policy and program decision making in mental health agencies (MHAs). DATA SOURCES: Primary data were collected through web-based surveys of state (N = 221) and county (N = 117) MHA officials. DESIGN: The primary independent variable was a composite score quantifying the frequency of collaboration about children's mental health issues between officials in MHAs and six other state agencies. The dependent variables were composite scores quantifying the frequency of research use in children's mental health policy and program decision making in general and for specific purposes (i.e., conceptual, instrumental, tactical, imposed). Covariates were composite scores quantifying well-established determinants of research use (e.g., agency leadership, research use skills) in agency policy and program decision making. DATA METHODS: Separate multiple linear regression models estimated associations between frequency of inter-agency collaboration and research use scores, adjusting for other determinants of research use, respondent state, and other covariates. Data from state and county officials were analyzed separately. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The frequency of inter-agency collaboration was positively and independently associated with the frequency of research use in children's mental health policy making among state (ß = 0.22, p = 0.004) and county (ß = 0.39, p < 0.0001) MHA officials. Inter-agency collaboration was also the only variable significantly associated with the frequency of research use for all four specific purposes among state MHA officials, and similar findings we observed among county MHA officials. The magnitudes of associations between inter-agency collaboration and frequency of research use were generally stronger than for more well-established determinants of research use in policy making. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies that promote collaboration between MHA officials and external agencies could increase the use of research evidence in children's mental health policy and program decision making in MHAs.

Determinants of using children's mental health research in policymaking: variation by type of research use and phase of policy process.

BACKGROUND: Research use in policymaking is multi-faceted and has been the focus of extensive study. However, virtually no quantitative studies have examined whether the determinants of research use vary according to the type of research use or phase of policy process. Understanding such variation is important for selecting the targets of implementation strategies that aim to increase the frequency of research use in policymaking. METHODS: A web-based survey of US state agency officials involved with children's mental health policymaking was conducted between December 2019 and February 2020 (n = 224, response rate = 33.7%, 49 states responding (98%), median respondents per state = 4). The dependent variables were composite scores of the frequency of using children's mental health research in general, specific types of research use (i.e., conceptual, instrumental, tactical, imposed), and during different phases of the policy process (i.e., agenda setting, policy development, policy implementation). The independent variables were four composite scores of determinants of research use: agency leadership for research use, agency barriers to research use, research use skills, and dissemination barriers (e.g., lack of actionable messages/recommendations in research summaries, lack of interaction/collaboration with researchers). Separate multiple linear regression models estimated associations between determinant and frequency of research use scores. RESULTS: Determinants of research use varied significantly by type of research use and phase of policy process. For example, agency leadership for research use was the only determinant significantly associated with imposed research use (ß = 0.31, p < 0.001). Skills for research use were the only determinant associated with tactical research use (ß = 0.17, p = 0.03) and were only associated with research use in the agenda-setting phase (ß = 0.16, p = 0.04). Dissemination barriers were the most universal determinants of research use, as they were significantly and inversely associated with frequency of conceptual (ß = -0.21, p = 0.01) and instrumental (ß = -0.22, p = 0.01) research use and during all three phases of policy process. CONCLUSIONS: Decisions about the determinants to target with policy-focused implementation strategies-and the strategies that are selected to affect these targets-should reflect the specific types of research use that these strategies aim to influence.