This paper examines how Brownson et al. (2009) defines evidence-based public health policy and outlines the framework's three key domains: process, content, and outcomes. Each domain is explained with its respective data sources and examples drawn from the original study. The paper then applies this three-domain framework to the public health policy banning artificial trans fats in restaurants and bakeries nationwide, drawing on CDC guidance and FDA rulemaking. It also incorporates findings from Mays et al. (2006) on how the size and structure of public health systems affect their capacity to implement and evaluate such policies effectively.
The paper demonstrates applied framework analysis: it first explains Brownson et al.'s three-domain model in its own terms, then systematically maps each domain onto the trans fat policy case. This technique shows how theoretical constructs can be operationalized to evaluate real-world public health decisions, a core skill in health policy writing.
The paper opens with an introduction stating its objectives, then dedicates a section to each of the three policy domains with definitions, data sources, and examples. A fifth section applies the framework to the trans fat ban, domain by domain. A sixth section broadens the analysis using Mays et al.'s findings on system size and performance. The conclusion synthesizes both frameworks to argue that larger public health systems are better positioned to implement evidence-based nutrition policy.
The objective of this paper is to examine how Brownson et al. (2009) define evidence-based policy and to discuss the three domains of evidence within that framework. Additionally, this work considers a concrete policy case: the adoption of public health legislation banning the use of artificial trans fats in restaurants and bakeries nationwide. The Brownson et al. framework is applied to examine the three domains and to determine the evidence basis for that policy.
According to Brownson et al. (2009), public health policy has an important effect on individual health status, and what has been missing from the available knowledge is "a clear articulation of the definition of evidence-based policy and approaches to move the field forward" (p. 1576). The three key domains of evidence-based policy are: (1) process — understanding approaches to enhance the likelihood of policy adoption; (2) content — identifying specific policy elements that are likely to be effective; and (3) outcomes — documenting the potential impact of policy (p. 1576).
The first domain, process, has the objective of understanding approaches that will enhance the likelihood of policy adoption. The data sources for this domain are described as "key informant interviews, case studies, and surveys of setting-specific political contexts" (Brownson et al., 2009, p. 1578). The example provided by Brownson et al. (2009) relates to "understanding the lessons learned from different approaches and key players, included in state health reforms" (p. 1578).
The second domain, content, has the stated objective of identifying "specific policy elements that are likely to be effective" (Brownson et al., 2009, p. 1578). Data sources in this domain include systematic reviews and content analyses. The example given is the development of "model laws on tobacco that make use of decades of research on the impacts of policy on tobacco use" (Brownson et al., 2009, p. 1578).
The third domain, outcomes, has the objective of documenting the "potential impact on policy" (Brownson et al., 2009, p. 1578). Data sources include surveillance systems and "natural experiments tracking policy-related endpoints" (p. 1578). Examples provided by Brownson et al. (2009) include: (1) tracking changes in rates of self-reported seat belt use in relation to the passage of seat belt laws, and (2) describing the cost-effectiveness of child immunization requirements (p. 1578).
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), trans fats were "created by chemists using a food process known as hydrogenation, where liquid oils are converted into solid fats." Trans fats, also known as partially hydrogenated oils, were originally intended to replace saturated fats, which had been found to contribute to heart disease. Unlike other dietary fats, trans fats are not essential to human health, do not promote good health, and increase the risk of coronary heart disease (CDC, 2014, p. 1). Because of this elevated risk, several jurisdictions moved to reduce or eliminate trans fats from use in restaurants and schools.
A significant regulatory milestone occurred on July 11, 2003, when the FDA published a final rule in the Federal Register amending its food labeling regulations to require that artificial trans fat be listed on the nutrition label of conventional foods and dietary supplements, a rule that went into effect on January 1, 2006.
Applying the first domain of Brownson et al. (2009) — the process domain — to this policy involves conducting interviews with key informants about the listing of trans fat on nutritional labels, as well as conducting case studies and surveys of the relevant political and regulatory context. Applying the second domain, content, involves identifying the specific policy elements most likely to be effective. This would include conducting systematic reviews related to the labeling of foods and dietary supplements, using the trans fat labeling requirement as a model. Applying the third domain, outcomes, involves documenting the potential impact of banning trans fats in restaurants and bakeries and monitoring those establishments for compliance and the continued use of trans fat.
Implementation of nutrition labeling for trans fat in food items will be more successful in areas served by larger public health systems, because those systems have access to the community partners necessary to conduct research both before and after requiring trans fat labeling. The larger public health system's access to a broader support network throughout its service area strengthens its ability to apply all three domains as described by Brownson et al. (2009). In order to implement evidence-based policy effectively, larger public health systems are better positioned to achieve the goals of process, content, and outcome evaluation.
You’re 72% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.