Dataset Information

Audience segmentation to disseminate behavioral health evidence to legislators: an empirical clustering analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Elected officials (e.g., legislators) are an important but understudied population in dissemination research. Audience segmentation is essential in developing dissemination strategies that are tailored for legislators with different characteristics, but sophisticated audience segmentation analyses have not been conducted with this population. An empirical clustering audience segmentation study was conducted to (1) identify behavioral health (i.e., mental health and substance abuse) audience segments among US state legislators, (2) identify legislator characteristics that are predictive of segment membership, and (3) determine whether segment membership is predictive of support for state behavioral health parity laws.

Methods

Latent class analysis (LCA) was used. Data were from a multi-modal (post-mail, e-mail, telephone) survey of state legislators fielded in 2017 (N?=?475). Nine variables were included in the LCA (e.g., perceptions of behavioral health treatment effectiveness, mental illness stigma). Binary logistic regression tested associations between legislator characteristics (e.g., political party, gender, ideology) and segment membership. Multi-level logistic regression assessed the predictive validity of segment membership on support for parity laws. A name was developed for each segment that captured its most salient features.

Results

Three audience segments were identified. Budget-oriented skeptics with stigma (47% of legislators) had the least faith in behavioral health treatment effectiveness, had the most mental illness stigma, and were most influenced by budget impact. This segment was predominantly male, Republican, and ideologically conservative. Action-oriented supporters (24%) were most likely to have introduced a behavioral health bill, most likely to identify behavioral health issues as policy priorities, and most influenced by research evidence. This was the most politically and ideologically diverse segment. Passive supporters (29%) had the greatest faith in treatment effectiveness and the least stigma, but were also least likely to have introduced a behavioral health bill. Segment membership was a stronger predictor of support for parity laws than almost all other legislator characteristics.

Conclusions

State legislators are a heterogeneous audience when it comes to behavioral health. There is a need to develop and test behavioral health evidence dissemination strategies that are tailored for legislators in different audience segments. Empirical clustering approaches to audience segmentation are a potentially valuable tool for dissemination science.

SUBMITTER: Purtle J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6148796 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA large proportion of the US population has limited access to mental health treatments because insurance providers limit the utilization of mental health services in ways that are more restrictive than for physical health services. Comprehensive state mental health parity legislation (C-SMHPL) is an evidence-based policy intervention that enhances mental health insurance coverage and improves access to care. Implementation of C-SMHPL, however, is limited. State policymakers have the exclusive authority to implement C-SMHPL, but sparse guidance exists to inform the design of strategies to disseminate evidence about C-SMHPL, and more broadly, evidence-based treatments and mental illness, to this audience. The aims of this exploratory audience research study are to (1) characterize US State policymakers' knowledge and attitudes about C-SMHPL and identify individual- and state-level attributes associated with support for C-SMHPL; and (2) integrate quantitative and qualitative data to develop a conceptual framework to disseminate evidence about C-SMHPL, evidence-based treatments, and mental illness to US State policymakers.MethodsThe study uses a multi-level (policymaker, state), mixed method (QUAN→qual) approach and is guided by Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework, adapted to incorporate constructs from Aarons' Model of Evidence-Based Implementation in Public Sectors. A multi-modal survey (telephone, post-mail, e-mail) of 600 US State policymakers (500 legislative, 100 administrative) will be conducted and responses will be linked to state-level variables. The survey will span domains such as support for C-SMHPL, knowledge and attitudes about C-SMHPL and evidence-based treatments, mental illness stigma, and research dissemination preferences. State-level variables will measure factors associated with C-SMHPL implementation, such as economic climate and political environment. Multi-level regression will determine the relative strength of individual- and state-level variables on policymaker support for C-SMHPL. Informed by survey results, semi-structured interviews will be conducted with approximately 50 US State policymakers to elaborate upon quantitative findings. Then, using a systematic process, quantitative and qualitative data will be integrated and a US State policymaker-focused C-SMHPL dissemination framework will be developed.DiscussionStudy results will provide the foundation for hypothesis-driven, experimental studies testing the effects of different dissemination strategies on state policymakers' support for, and implementation of, evidence-based mental health policy interventions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:High-cost patients are a frequent focus of improvement projects based on primary care and other settings. Efforts to characterize high-cost, high-need patients are needed to inform care planning, but such efforts often rely on a priori assumptions, masking underlying complexities of a heterogenous population. OBJECTIVE:To define recognizable subgroups of patients among high-cost adults based on clinical conditions, and describe their survival and future spending. DESIGN:Retrospective observational cohort study. PARTICIPANTS:Within a large integrated delivery system with 2.7 million adult members, we selected the top 1% of continuously enrolled adults with respect to total healthcare expenditures during 2010. MAIN MEASURES:We used latent class analysis to identify clusters of alike patients based on 53 hierarchical condition categories. Prognosis as measured by healthcare spending and survival was assessed through 2014 for the resulting classes of patients. RESULTS:Among 21,183 high-cost adults, seven clinically distinctive subgroups of patients emerged. Classes included end-stage renal disease (12% of high-cost population), cardiopulmonary conditions (17%), diabetes with multiple comorbidities (8%), acute illness superimposed on chronic conditions (11%), conditions requiring highly specialized care (14%), neurologic and catastrophic conditions (5%), and patients with few comorbidities (the largest class, 33%). Over 4 years of follow-up, 6566 (31%) patients died, and survival in the classes ranged from 43 to 88%. Spending regressed to the mean in all classes except the ESRD and diabetes with multiple comorbidities groups. CONCLUSIONS:Data-driven characterization of high-cost adults yielded clinically intuitive classes that were associated with survival and reflected markedly different healthcare needs. Relatively few high-cost patients remain persistently high cost over 4 years. Our results suggest that high-cost patients, while not a monolithic group, can be segmented into few subgroups. These subgroups may be the focus of future work to understand appropriateness of care and design interventions accordingly.

Project description:BackgroundIn Vietnam, a lower-middle income country, while the overall skill- and knowledge-based quality of health workforce is improving, health workers are disproportionately distributed across different economic regions. A similar trend appears to be in relation to health outcomes between those regions. It is unclear, however, whether there is any relationship between the distribution of health workers and the achievement of health outcomes in the context of Vietnam. This study examines the statistical relationship between the availability of health workers and health outcomes across the different economic regions in Vietnam.MethodsWe constructed a panel data of six economic regions covering 8 years (2006-2013) and used principal components analysis regressions to estimate the impact of health workforce on health outcomes. The dependent variables representing the outcomes included life expectancy at birth, infant mortality, and under-five mortality rates. Besides the health workforce as our target explanatory variable, we also controlled for key demographic factors including regional income per capita, poverty rate, illiteracy rate, and population density.ResultsThe numbers of doctors, nurses, midwives, and pharmacists have been rising in the country over the last decade. However, there are notable differences across the different categories. For example, while the numbers of nurses increased considerably between 2006 and 2013, the number of pharmacists slightly decreased between 2011 and 2013. We found statistically significant evidence of the impact of density of doctors, nurses, midwives, and pharmacists on improvement to life expectancy and reduction of infant and under-five mortality rates.ConclusionsAvailability of different categories of health workforce can positively contribute to improvements in health outcomes and ultimately extend the life expectancy of populations. Therefore, increasing investment into more equitable distribution of four main categories of health workforce (doctors, nurses, midwives, and pharmacists) can be an important strategy for improving health outcomes in Vietnam and other similar contexts. Future interventions will also need to consider an integrated approach, building on the link between the health and the development.

Project description:To examine whether family history of unprovoked seizures is associated with behavioral disorders in epilepsy probands, thereby supporting the hypothesis of shared underlying genetic susceptibility to these disorders.We conducted an analysis of the 308 probands with childhood onset epilepsy from the Connecticut Study of Epilepsy with information on first-degree family history of unprovoked seizures and of febrile seizures whose parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) at the 9-year follow-up. Clinical cutoffs for CBCL problem and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-Oriented scales were examined. The association between first-degree family history of unprovoked seizure and behavioral disorders was assessed separately in uncomplicated and complicated epilepsy and separately for first-degree family history of febrile seizures. A subanalysis, accounting for the tendency for behavioral disorders to run in families, was adjusted for siblings with the same disorder as the proband. Prevalence ratios were used to describe the associations.In probands with uncomplicated epilepsy, first-degree family history of unprovoked seizure was significantly associated with clinical cutoffs for Total Problems and Internalizing Disorders. Among Internalizing Disorders, clinical cutoffs for Withdrawn/Depressed, and DSM-Oriented scales for Affective Disorder and Anxiety Disorder were significantly associated with family history of unprovoked seizures. Clinical cutoffs for Aggressive Behavior and Delinquent Behavior, and DSM-Oriented scales for Conduct Disorder and Oppositional Defiant Disorder were significantly associated with family history of unprovoked seizure. Adjustment for siblings with the same disorder revealed significant associations for the relationship between first-degree family history of unprovoked seizure and Total Problems and Aggressive Behavior in probands with uncomplicated epilepsy; marginally significant results were seen for Internalizing Disorder, Withdrawn/Depressed, and Anxiety Disorder. There was no association between family history of unprovoked seizure and behavioral problems in probands with complicated epilepsy. First-degree family history of febrile seizure was not associated with behavioral problems in probands with uncomplicated or in those with complicated epilepsy.Increased occurrence of behavioral disorders in probands with uncomplicated epilepsy and first degree family history of unprovoked seizure suggests familial clustering of these disorders. This supports the idea that behavioral disorders may be another manifestation of the underlying pathophysiology involved in epilepsy or closely related to it.

Project description:Engagement with scientific manuscripts is frequently facilitated by Twitter and other social media platforms. As such, the demographics of a paper's social media audience provide a wealth of information about how scholarly research is transmitted, consumed, and interpreted by online communities. By paying attention to public perceptions of their publications, scientists can learn whether their research is stimulating positive scholarly and public thought. They can also become aware of potentially negative patterns of interest from groups that misinterpret their work in harmful ways, either willfully or unintentionally, and devise strategies for altering their messaging to mitigate these impacts. In this study, we collected 331,696 Twitter posts referencing 1,800 highly tweeted bioRxiv preprints and leveraged topic modeling to infer the characteristics of various communities engaging with each preprint on Twitter. We agnostically learned the characteristics of these audience sectors from keywords each user's followers provide in their Twitter biographies. We estimate that 96% of the preprints analyzed are dominated by academic audiences on Twitter, suggesting that social media attention does not always correspond to greater public exposure. We further demonstrate how our audience segmentation method can quantify the level of interest from nonspecialist audience sectors such as mental health advocates, dog lovers, video game developers, vegans, bitcoin investors, conspiracy theorists, journalists, religious groups, and political constituencies. Surprisingly, we also found that 10% of the preprints analyzed have sizable (>5%) audience sectors that are associated with right-wing white nationalist communities. Although none of these preprints appear to intentionally espouse any right-wing extremist messages, cases exist in which extremist appropriation comprises more than 50% of the tweets referencing a given preprint. These results present unique opportunities for improving and contextualizing the public discourse surrounding scientific research.