Perceived Persuasiveness of Evidence About Adverse Childhood Experiences: Results From a National Survey.


Journal

Academic pediatrics
ISSN: 1876-2867
Titre abrégé: Acad Pediatr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101499145

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2021
Historique:
received: 29 03 2020
revised: 25 05 2020
accepted: 31 05 2020
pubmed: 20 6 2020
medline: 29 7 2021
entrez: 20 6 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Advocates must make decisions about the types of evidence they emphasize when communicating to cultivate support for adverse childhood experience (ACE) prevention policies. This study sought to characterize public perceptions of the persuasiveness of 12 ACE evidence statements and assess differences by ideology in the strength of these evidence messages as rationales for ACE prevention policies. A web-based survey of a nationally representative sample of US adults was conducted using the KnowledgePanel (N = 503, completion rate = 60.5%). Respondents read ACE evidence statements and answered questions about the extent to which each was perceived as persuasive. Data were collected and analyzed in 2019. The evidence statements perceived as most persuasive (scoring range 3-17) were those about ACEs as risk factors for mental health and substance use conditions (mean = 12.39) and suicide (mean = 12.14); ACEs generating financial costs for society (mean = 12.03); and the consequences of ACEs being preventable by a supportive adult (mean = 11.97). The evidence statements perceived as least persuasive were about ACEs generating health care costs for individuals (mean = 9.42) and ACEs as risk factors for physical health conditions (mean = 9.47). A larger proportion of liberals than conservatives rated every statement as providing a "strong reason" for ACE prevention policies. These differences were largest for evidence about ACEs generating financial costs for society (84.6% vs 42.8%, P < .0001) and socioeconomic disparities in ACEs (65.1% vs 32.9%, P < .0001). Many ACE evidence statements commonly used in policy advocacy differ from those perceived as most persuasive among a nationally representative sample of US adults.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32553780
pii: S1876-2859(20)30248-5
doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2020.05.031
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

529-533

Subventions

Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : KL2 TR001862
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Academic Pediatric Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Jonathan Purtle (J)

Department of Health Management and Policy, Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health (J Purtle and KL Nelson), Philadelphia, Pa. Electronic address: JPP46@Drexel.edu.

Katherine L Nelson (KL)

Department of Health Management and Policy, Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health (J Purtle and KL Nelson), Philadelphia, Pa.

Aditi Srivastav (A)

Children's Trust of South Carolina (A Srivastav), Columbia, SC.

Sarah E Gollust (SE)

Division of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota School of Public Health (SE Gollust), Minneapolis, Minn.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH