Log in
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)/Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) Guidance on "Psychosocial Care for People Affected by Disasters and Major Incidents: a Model for Designing, Delivering and Managing Psychosocial Services for People Involved in Major Incidents, Conflict, Disasters and Terrorism" is a conceptual and practical resource for: developing government policy; planning services, and providing training for health and social care staff. It was informed by underpinning research conducted in Aberdeen following the 1988 Piper Alpha oil platform disaster and evidence briefings generated from a comprehensive review of the world literature. Adopted as best practice guidance by all 28 NATO Members and Partner Nations, it has had regional, national and international impact by: enabling authorities to deliver integrated psychosocial care and mental health services; enhance training; raise awareness, and facilitate the effective utilisation of resources in responding to psychosocial/mental health needs post- incident.
This case study is an illustrative example of the immediate and interim impact of our research with and for the organic waste industry. Specifically, it deals with effective management of the risk to the health of workers from exposure to bioaerosols. Led by Sykes, since 2006 a portfolio of research (both publicly available academic studies and confidential industrial reports) has been developed which led the Association for Organics Recycling (AfOR) to commission a technical guidance document for the composting industry in 2012. High-risk work activities and potential for harm to workers' health were identified, and recommendations on risk reduction strategies and good practice were made which have been endorsed by the Health and Safety Executive.
[Throughout this Impact Case Study, references to the underpinning research are numbered 1 to 6; sources to corroborate the impact are numbered 7 to 16.]
In November 2008, Professor Sir Michael Marmot and his team at UCL were asked by the Secretary of State for Health to chair an independent review to propose the most effective evidence-based strategies for reducing health inequalities in England. The Marmot Review, published in 2010, has fundamentally shifted discourse on health inequalities in the UK and internationally. It has shaped public health services across England and around the world, guided government and international policy, and has given rise to a new commitment from service providers and health professionals to reducing health inequalities and addressing the social determinants of health.
Health inequalities are recognised as a critical UK policy issue with life expectancy gaps of up to 28 years between the least and most deprived areas. This case-study demonstrates how Durham University research has led to: (a) changing health service commissioning (with County Durham and Darlington Primary Care Trust [PCT]): (b) influencing NHS funding policy (by generating Parliamentary debate); as well as (c) contributing to the development of the new public health system in England and Wales (as part of the Strategic Review of Health Inequalities in England post-2010 [Marmot Review]).
Research into the prevalence of workplace bullying and stress conducted between March 2008 and December 2009 in New Zealand has had three main impacts. The research findings highlight the importance of psychosocial issues in workplaces and directly contributed to the New Zealand Government's decision to include psychosocial workplace hazards as a priority in the Occupational Health Action Plan to 2013. Data from the research is one of the main factual bases for a new guideline developed by staff in the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on workplace bullying. The guidelines made the research findings available to Health and Safety Inspectors and Professionals, Unions and Employer Groups as well as presenting practices for Occupational Safety and Health Fact Sheets for preventing and dealing with bullying at work.
Our impact has been to protect the public by informing and influencing both the international policy debate on health claims associated with soy consumption, and the relevant regulatory risk assessment authorities.
Our research formed a key component of dossiers that resulted in the rejection of health claims by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA, the EU agency responsible for the scientific substantiation of health claims) relating to soy isoflavones and a number of health endpoints including bone health, heart health and menopausal symptoms. Earlier work had underpinned decisions on comparable health claims in the US and UK.
Our soy isoflavone research also provided key scientific data on the absorption of isoflavones by the body (and dependence on age and food source) to the UK Government Committee on Toxicity (COT) policy review on the toxicity of chemicals with a specific focus on soy infant formula. This expands on COT advice in 2003, which used earlier Cassidy research and helped to inform the UK government's (Food Standards Agency) research programme on phytoestrogens /isoflavones.
Globally, many health research-funding organisations, public and charitable, felt the need to demonstrate to policymakers and the public how their investments in research were benefitting society. HERG's research on developing techniques for assessing the payback (or impact) from health research tackled this need. The payback stream of research itself has had significant, wide- reaching and cumulative impacts. First, internationally, health research funding bodies adopted the framework in their evaluation strategies, including to provide accountability. Second, many stakeholders made extensive use the findings of payback studies in public debate and private lobbying for public expenditure on health research. Third, governments, public research funding bodies and medical research charities, from the UK to Australia, used the findings from payback studies to inform decisions regarding the levels and distribution of health research funding, with the aim of increasing the health and economic benefits that come from investments in research.
The `People in Public Health' (PIPH) study and related research on health trainers, health champions and volunteers has brought together evidence on rationales for lay engagement, effectiveness and models of support. Dissemination activities, supported by a Department of Health grant, have achieved reach into various policy arenas and national networks. At the same time there is evidence of research utilisation in public health practice. One of the impacts has been the establishment of `Active Citizens for Health', a national network of partner organisations to bring together evidence and learning that has been hosted by Leeds Metropolitan University.
Evidence about the need for and provision of health visiting services generated through research undertaken at King's College London (KCL) has underpinned major changes in national policies for health visiting. Our findings about health visitors' practice, availability and distribution of services and effectiveness in terms of parenting/child outcomes, revealed both shortfalls in provision and opportunities for improvement and led to the development of a new caseload weighting tool and funding model for service planning. The accumulated evidence from this research helped convince the UK Government in 2010 to commit to 4,200 more health visitors by 2015 — a workforce expansion of nearly 50% — in a time of austerity and restraint elsewhere in the public sector.
This case study presents the impact of the Health and Temperature Research Group (HTRG) at Sheffield Hallam University, led by Professor Tod. The group generates novel, collaborative, translational, interdisciplinary (e.g. health, housing and environment, energy and welfare) research with a focus on cold related ill health. The research impact is illustrated here by The Keeping Warm in Later Life Project (KWILLT). KWILLT findings provide a unique understanding of the complex environment and multiple factors influencing older people keeping warm and well in winter. Beneficiaries include NHS, local and national policy makers, and practice organisations.