Cited by 68Health Policy Implementation ScienceHealth Sciences Research and EducationPublic Health Policies and Education

Capacity building for evidence-based decision making in local health departments: scaling up an effective training approach

Open access
Jacobs, Julie A, Duggan, Kathleen, Erwin, Paul, Smith, Carson, Borawski, Elaine, Compton, Judy, D’Ambrosio, Luann, Frank, Scott H +5 more·2014·Implementation Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are few studies describing how to scale up effective capacity-building approaches for public health practitioners. This study tested local-level evidence-based decision making (EBDM) capacity-building efforts in four U.S. states (Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, and Washington) with a quasi-experimental design. METHODS: Partners within the four states delivered a previously established Evidence-Based Public Health (EBPH) training curriculum to local health department (LHD) staff. They worked with the research team to modify the curriculum with local data and examples while remaining attentive to course fidelity. Pre- and post-assessments of course participants (n=82) and an external control group (n=214) measured importance, availability (i.e., how available a skill is when needed, either within the skillset of the respondent or among others in the agency), and gaps in ten EBDM competencies. Simple and multiple linear regression models assessed the differences between pre- and post-assessment scores. Course participants also assessed the impact of the course on their work. RESULTS: Course participants reported greater increases in the availability, and decreases in the gaps, in EBDM competencies at post-test, relative to the control group. In adjusted models, significant differences (p<0.05) were found in 'action planning,' 'evaluation design,' 'communicating research to policymakers,' 'quantifying issues (using descriptive epidemiology),' and 'economic evaluation.' Nearly 45% of participants indicated that EBDM increased within their agency since the training. Course benefits included becoming better leaders and making scientifically informed decisions. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential for improving EBDM capacity among LHD practitioners using a train-the-trainer approach involving diverse partners. This approach allowed for local tailoring of strategies and extended the reach of the EBPH course.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13012-014-0124-x

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jacobs, J. A., Duggan, K., Erwin, P., Smith, C., Borawski, E., Compton, J., D’Ambrosio, L., Frank, S. H., Frazier-Kouassi, S., Hannon, P. A., Leeman, J., Mainor, A., & Brownson, R. C.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Brownson, Ross C
Venue
Implementation Science
Published
2014-09-24
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
124-124
ISSN
1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2145210733
Cited by
68
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1
FWCI
13.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • Washington University in St. Louis
  • Saint Louis University
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000439)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U48DP001903)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK092950)
  • National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (U48 DP001930, U48-DP-001903)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
Keywords
evidence-based decision making, capacity building, local health departments, trainer training, public health workforce, action planning, economic evaluation, descriptive epidemiology, evaluation design
MeSH terms
Data Collection, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Decision Making, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Personnel Selection, Professional Competence, Public Health, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Control Groups, Evidence-Based Practice, Capacity Building

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review