Voices for Change: A Taxonomy of Public Communications Campaigns and Their Evaluation Challenges

Makes the case that communications campaigns cover a broad range of different types and characteristics, and can be differentiated along the axes of purpose, scope, and maturity. Examines what communications campaigns that fall on different areas of these three axes look like, and how where they fall may affect the evaluation approach used and lead to distinct evaluation challenges and needs

THE CONCISE GUIDE TO PHARMACOLOGY 2019/20 : G protein- coupled receptors

The Concise Guide to PHARMACOLOGY 2019/20 is the fourth in this series of biennial publications. The Concise Guide provides concise overviews of the key properties of nearly 1800 human drug targets with an emphasis on selective pharmacology (where available), plus links to the open access knowledgebase source of drug targets and their ligands (www.guidetopharmacology.org), which provides more detailed views of target and ligand properties. Although the Concise Guide represents approximately 400 pages, the material presented is substantially reduced compared to information and links presented on the website. It provides a permanent, citable, point-in-time record that will survive database updates. The full contents of this section can be found at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.14748. G protein-coupled receptors are one of the six major pharmacological targets into which the Guide is divided, with the others being: ion channels, nuclear hormone receptors, catalytic receptors, enzymes and transporters. These are presented with nomenclature guidance and summary information on the best available pharmacological tools, alongside key references and suggestions for further reading. The landscape format of the Concise Guide is designed to facilitate comparison of related targets from material contemporary to mid-2019, and supersedes data presented in the 2017/18, 2015/16 and 2013/14 Concise Guides and previous Guides to Receptors and Channels. It is produced in close conjunction with the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology Committee on Receptor Nomenclature and Drug Classification (NC-IUPHAR), therefore, providing official IUPHAR classification and nomenclature for human drug targets, where appropriate.Peer reviewe

THE CONCISE GUIDE TO PHARMACOLOGY 2021/22: G protein-coupled receptors.

The Concise Guide to PHARMACOLOGY 2021/22 is the fifth in this series of biennial publications. The Concise Guide provides concise overviews, mostly in tabular format, of the key properties of nearly 1900 human drug targets with an emphasis on selective pharmacology (where available), plus links to the open access knowledgebase source of drug targets and their ligands (www.guidetopharmacology.org), which provides more detailed views of target and ligand properties. Although the Concise Guide constitutes over 500 pages, the material presented is substantially reduced compared to information and links presented on the website. It provides a permanent, citable, point-in-time record that will survive database updates. The full contents of this section can be found at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/bph.15538. G protein-coupled receptors are one of the six major pharmacological targets into which the Guide is divided, with the others being: ion channels, nuclear hormone receptors, catalytic receptors, enzymes and transporters. These are presented with nomenclature guidance and summary information on the best available pharmacological tools, alongside key references and suggestions for further reading. The landscape format of the Concise Guide is designed to facilitate comparison of related targets from material contemporary to mid-2021, and supersedes data presented in the 2019/20, 2017/18, 2015/16 and 2013/14 Concise Guides and previous Guides to Receptors and Channels. It is produced in close conjunction with the Nomenclature and Standards Committee of the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (NC-IUPHAR), therefore, providing official IUPHAR classification and nomenclature for human drug targets, where appropriate

Home Energy Conservation: Affordable Housing and the Environment

For low-income homeowners and renters, paying the utility bills every month can become a struggle. Even with assistance from programs such as Erie County Social Services HEAP program, many find paying those bills takes up a large portion of one’s income, decreasing funds available for other necessities. Finding inexpensive ways to decrease utility bills can save money that could be better used elsewhere. One way to reduce utility bills is to conserve energy. Not only does conserving energy lower the costs of utility bills, but it is also beneficial for the environment. This paper will discuss the need for home energy conservation within the City of Buffalo and how a home energy conservation program can be implemented. Specifically, the following topics will be covered: the plight of low-income citizens in Buffalo, an introduction to energy conservation, numerous methods of home energy conservation, and a suggested home energy conservation program that the City should adopt.Environment__Home_Energy_Conservation.pdf: 16 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

"My good friends on the other side of the aisle aren't bothered by those facts": U.S. State legislators' use of evidence in making policy on abortion.

ObjectiveIn recent years, U.S. states have passed many restrictive abortion policies with a rationale of protecting health and safety, in apparent contravention of abundant scientific evidence on abortion safety. This study explored whether and how state legislators use scientific evidence when deciding abortion policy.Study designWe conducted 29 semi-structured interviews with state legislators and their aides in Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia in March through July 2017. We recruited via e-mail to members of all health-related committees of the General Assembly in each state, plus sponsors and co-sponsors of 2017 abortion bills, with follow-up via phone and in person. We conducted iterative thematic analysis of all interview transcripts.ResultsWe found no cases of lawmakers' decisions on abortion being shifted by evidence. However, some lawmakers used evidence in simplified form to support their claims on abortion. Lawmakers gave credence to evidence they received from trusted sources, and that which supported their pre-existing policy preferences. Personal stories appeared more convincing than evidence, with participants drawing broad conclusions from anecdotes. Democrats and Republicans had different views on bias in evidence.ConclusionsIn this sample, evidence did not drive state legislators' policymaking on abortion. However, evidence did help inform high-level understanding of abortion, if such evidence supported legislators' pre-existing policy preferences. This work may help public health practitioners and researchers develop more realistic expectations for how research interacts with policymaking.Implications of this workTo increase the utility of research, reproductive health researchers and practitioners should 1) work with established intermediaries to convey findings to lawmakers; 2) present stories that illustrate research findings; and 3) consider the evidence needs of the judicial branch, in addition to those of legislators

"Alcohol During Pregnancy? Nobody Does That Anymore": State Legislators' Use of Evidence in Making Policy on Alcohol Use in Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE:In recent years, U.S. states have passed many laws addressing alcohol use in pregnancy, despite limited evidence on the impact of such policies. This study explores how state legislators use evidence when making policy on alcohol use in pregnancy. METHOD:Study data are drawn from semistructured interviews with 29 state lawmakers and their aides in Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia, conducted in March through July 2017. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed by inductive and deductive methods. RESULTS:Despite evidence on the harms of alcohol use in pregnancy, most lawmakers did not express concern about this topic. Instead, they expressed concern about opioid use in pregnancy. Personal experiences, anecdotes, and known contacts influenced legislators' views on substance use in pregnancy, whereas evidence, for the most part, did not. The intermediaries who typically bring evidence about problems and solutions to legislators did not appear to be raising the issue of alcohol use in pregnancy on legislators' agenda. CONCLUSIONS:Basic evidence on the prevalence and harms of alcohol use in pregnancy did not appear to influence state lawmakers' policy priorities. Concern over opioid use in general may provide a window of opportunity to educate legislators on the relative scope and harms of alcohol and opioid use in pregnancy. It remains unclear why states are passing alcohol-in-pregnancy policies. More research is needed to explore how state lawmakers form their understanding of substance use in pregnancy and related policies