Measuring research influence on drug policy: A case example of two epidemiological monitoring systems

International Journal of Drug Policy

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 30-37

  Ritter, Alison ^a   Lancaster, Kari ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Drug policy; Policy influence; Research utilisation

Indexed keywords

ILLICIT DRUG;

ARTICLE; DOCUMENT EXAMINATION; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; HEALTH CARE POLICY; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIAL MEDIA; SYSTEM ANALYSIS;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; DECISION MAKING; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL MONITORING; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MASS MEDIA; N-METHYL-3,4-METHYLENEDIOXYAMPHETAMINE; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; POLICY MAKING; PUBLIC OPINION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; STREET DRUGS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 84872488299     PISSN: 09553959     EISSN: 18734758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2012.02.005     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Australian Counselling Association. (2007). Submission to the Inquiry into Mental Health Services in Australia. August 2007 <> Retrieved 26.11.10. http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/clac_ctte/mental_health/submissions/sub26.pdf.
2. Australian Crime Commission Illicit drug data report 2001-2002: Commonwealth of Australia 2003.
3. Australian Crime Commission Illicit drug data report 2002-2003: Commonwealth of Australia 2004.
4. Australian Crime Commission Illicit drug data report 2003-2004: Commonwealth of Australia 2005.
5. Australian Crime Commission Illicit drug data report 2004-2005: Commonwealth of Australia 2006.
6. Australian Crime Commission Illicit drug data report 2005-2006: Commonwealth of Australia 2007.
7. Australian Crime Commission Illicit drug data report 2006-2007: Commonwealth of Australia 2008.
8. Australian Crime Commission Illicit drug data report 2007-2008: Commonwealth of Australia 2009.
9. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Statistics on drug use in Australia 2002 2003, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra.
10. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Statistics on drug use in Australia 2004 2005, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra.
11. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2010). Alcohol and other drug use statistics-The national drug strategy household surveys. <> Retrieved 07.10.10. http://www.aihw.gov.au/drugs/ndshs/index.cfm.
12. Canavan J., Gillen A., Shaw A. Measuring research impact: Developing practical and cost-effective approaches. Evidence and Policy 2009, 5(2):167-177.
13. Clegg Smith K., Wakefield M., Siebel C., Szczypka G., Slater S., Terry-McElrath Y., et al. Coding the news: The development of a methodological framework for coding and analyzing newspaper coverage of tobacco issues (No. 21) 2002, Impact Teen, Chicago.
14. Darke S., Kaye S., Topp L. Cocaine use in New South Wales, Australia, 1996-2000: 5 year monitoring of trends in price, purity, availability and use from the illicit drug reporting system. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2002, 67(1):81-88.
15. Degenhardt L., Day C., Dietze P., Pointer S., Conroy E., Collins L., et al. Effects of a sustained heroin shortage in three Australian States. Addiction 2005, 100(7):908-920.
16. Degenhardt L., Roxburgh A., Van Beek I., Hall W.D., Robinson M.K.F., Ross J., et al. The effects of the market withdrawal of temazepam gel capsules on benzodiazepine injecting in Sydney, Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review 2008, 27(2):145-151.
17. Donovan C. State of the art in assessing research impact: Introduction to a special issue. Research Evaluation 2011, 20(3). 179-179.
18. Donovan C., Hanney S. The payback framework explained. Research Evaluation 2011, 20(3):181-183.
19. Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform. (2006). Submission to the Inquiry into Amphetamine and other synthetic drugs. March 2006 <> Retrieved 26.11.10. http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/fhs/illicitdrugs/report/fullreport.pdf.
20. Grant J., Brutscher P., Kirk S., Butler L., Wooding S. Capturing research impacts: A review of international practice 2009, RAND Europe, Cambridge.
21. Haas P.M. Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization 1992, 46(1):1-35.
22. Hall W., Degenhardt L. The Australian Illicit Drug Reporting System: Monitoring trends in illicit drug availability, use and drug-related harm in Australia 1996-2006. Contemporary Drug Problems 2009, 36(Fall-Winter):643-661.
23. Hanney S., Gonzalez-Block M., Buxton M., Kogan M. The utilisation of health research in policy-making: Concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Research Policy and Systems 2003, 1(2).
24. Hanney S.R., Grant J., Wooding S., Buxton M.J. Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of health research: The impact of funding by the UK's 'Arthritis Research Campaign'. Health Research Policy Systems 2004, 23(2):4.
25. Haynes A., Derrick G., Chapman S., Redman S., Hall W., Gillespie J., et al. From 'our world' to the 'real world': Exploring the views and behaviour of policy-influential Australian public health researchers. Social Science and Medicine 2011, 72(7):1047-1055.
26. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Human Services The winnable war on drugs: The impact of illicit drug use on families 2007, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
27. Hughes C., Lodge M., Ritter A. Monograph No.18: The coordination of Australian illicit drug policy: A governance perspective 2010, Drug Policy Modelling Program, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, Sydney.
28. Hughes C., Lancaster K., Spicer B. How do Australian news media depict illicit drug issues? An analysis of print media reporting across and between illicit drugs, 2003-2008. International Journal of Drug Policy 2011, 22(4):285-291.
29. Hughes C., Spicer B., Lancaster K., Matthew-Simmons F., Dillon P. Monograph No. 19, Media reporting on illicit drugs in Australia: Trends and impacts on youth attitudes to illicit drug use 2010, Drug Policy Modelling Program, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, Sydney.
30. Intergovernmental Committee on Drugs Intergovernmental Committee on Drugs National Drug Strategy Framework Annual Report 2001 to the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy 2002, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
31. Jenkinson R., Clark N., Fry C., Dobbin M. Buprenorphine diversion and injection in Melbourne, Australia: An emerging issue?. Addiction 2005, 100(2):197-205.
32. Kalucy E.C., Jackson-Bowers E., McIntyre E., Reed R. The feasibility of determining the impact of primary health care research projects using the Payback Framework. Health Research Policy Systems 2009, 7:11.
33. Kingdon T. Agendas, alternatives and public policy 2003, Longman, New York. 2nd ed.
34. Kuruvilla S., Mays N., Pleasant A., Walt G. Describing the impact of health research: A Research Impact Framework. BMC Health Services Research 2006, 6(134).
35. Lancaster K., Hughes C., Spicer B., Matthew-Simmons F., Dillon P. Illicit drugs and the media: models of media effects for use in drug policy research. Drug and Alcohol Review 2011, 30(4):397-402.
36. Landry R., Lamari M., Amara N. The extent and determinants of the utilisation of university research in government agencies. Public Administration Review 2003, 63(2):192-205.
37. Lavis J., Ross S., McLeod C., Gildiner A. Measuring the impact of health research. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 2003, 8(3):165-170.
38. Lin V., Gibson B. Evidence-based Health Policy: Problems and possibilities 2003, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
39. Lomas J. Improving research dissemination and uptake in the health sector: beyond the sound of one hand clapping: McMaster University Center for Health Economics and Policy Analysis 1997.
40. Lomas J. Using " linkage and exchange" to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Affairs 2000, 19(3):236-240.
41. Lomas J. The in-between world of knowledge brokering. British Medical Journal 2007, 334:129-132.
42. LSE Government. (2011, 16 February). Researchers seek to measure the public impact of the social sciences. <> Retrieved 07.02.12. http://www2.lse.ac.uk/government/research/resgroups/LSEPublicPolicy/researchThemes/Impactofthesocialsciences.aspx.
43. LSE Public Policy Group. (2011). Maximizing the impacts of your research: A handbook for social scientists. London: LSE Government.
44. Matthew-Simmons, F., Love, S., & Ritter, A. (2008). Monograph No. 17: A review of Australian public opinion surveys on illicit drugs. DPMP Monograph Series. Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre.
45. McArthur M. Pushing the drug debate: The media's role in policy reform. Australian Journal of Social Issues 1999, 34(2):149-165.
46. Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy National Action Plan on Illicit Drugs 2001 to 2003-2003 2001, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
47. Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy The national drug strategy: Australia's Integrated Framework 2004-2009 2004, Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy, Canberra.
48. Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy National Amphetamine-type stimulant strategy 2008-2011 2006, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
49. Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy National cannabis strategy 2006-2009 2006, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
50. Moore G., Redman S., Haines M., Todd A. What works to increase the use of research in population health policy and programmes: A review. Evidence and Policy 2011, 7(3):277-305.
51. NSW Health. (2006). National leadership forum on ice. Druginfo. <> Retrieved 30.01.07. http://www.druginfo.nsw.gov.au/national_leadership_forum_on_ice.
52. Nutley S., Walter I., Davies H.T.O. Using Evidence: How research can inform public services 2007, The Policy Press, Bristol, UK.
53. Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Crime Commission Inquiry into the manufacture importation and use of amphetamines and other synthetic drugs (AOSD) in Australia 2007, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
54. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: In search of a method. Evaluation 2002, 8(2):157-181.
55. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: the promise of 'realist synthesis. Evaluation 2002, 8(3):340-358.
56. Ritter A. How do drug policy makers access research evidence?. International Journal of Drug Policy 2009, 20(1):70-75.
57. Ritter A., Bammer G. Models of policy making and their relevance for drug research. Drug and Alcohol Review 2010, 29:352-357.
58. Ritter A., Lancaster K., Grech K., Reuter P. Monograph No. 21, An assessment of illicit drug policy in Australia (1985-2010): Themes and trends 2011, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, Sydney.
59. Sabatier P.A. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences 1988, 21:129-168.
60. Siggins Miller, Miller M., Siggins I., Hall W., Bush B., McDonald D., et al. Evaluation and monitoring of the National Drug Strategy 2004-2009: Final report 2009, Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy, Canberra.
61. Sindicich N., Burns L. Australian drug trends in ecstasy and related Drug Markets 2010: Findings from the Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System (EDRS) 2010, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
62. Single E., Rohl T. The National Drug Strategy: Mapping the future. An evaluation of the National Drug Strategy 1993-1997 commissioned by the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy 1997, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
63. Smith R. Measuring the social impact of research: Difficult but necessary. British Medical Journal 2001, 323:528.
64. Spaapen J., van Drooge L. Introducing 'productive interactions' in social impact assessment. Research Evaluation 2011, 20(3):211-218.
65. Stafford J., Burns L. Australian drug trends 2009: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS) 2010, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
66. Success Works Evaluation of the National Drug Strategic Framework 1998-99-2003-04 2003, Success Works Pty Ltd., Canberra.
67. The Salvation Army in Australia. (2010). Alcohol awareness research. <> Retrieved 07.10.10. http://www.salvationarmy.org.au/services/alcohol-awareness/alcohol-research.html.
68. Topp L., Day C., Degenhardt L. Changes in patterns of drug injection concurrent with a sustained reduction in the availability of heroin in Australia. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2003, 70:275-286.
69. Wakefield M., Flay B., Nichter M., Giovino G. Role of the media in influencing trajectories of youth smoking. Addiction 2003, 98:79-103.
70. Walter I.C., Nutley S.M., Davies H.T.O. Developing a taxonomy of interventions used to increase the impact of research. Discussion Paper No. 3. Research Unit for Research Utilisation 2003, University of St Andrews, Accessed 10.11.10. http://www.ruru.ac.uk/.
71. Wardlaw, G. (2008). Final report: Illicit drug reporting system: Consultant's report to the Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health. NDARC Technical Report, No. 292. Sydney, NSW: University of New South Wales National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre.
72. Weiss C.H. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review 1979, 39:426-431.
73. Using social research in public policy making 1977, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA. C.H. Weiss (Ed.).
74. Weiss C.H., Bucuvalas M.J. Truth tests and utility tests: Decision-makers' frames of reference for social science research. American Sociological Review 1980, 45(2):302-313.
75. Weiss C.H., Murphy-Graham E., Birkeland S. An alternate route to policy influence: How evaluations affect D.A.R.E. American Journal of Evaluation 2005, 26(1):12-30.
76. Weiss J.A., Weiss C.H. Social scientists and decision makers look at the usefulness of mental health research. American Psychologist 1981, 36(8):837-847.
77. Westfall J., Mold J., Fagnan L. Practice-based research: 'Blue Highways' on the NIH roadmap. Journal of the American Medical Association 2007, 297(4):403-406.