Evidence-Based Policy Making: Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association

on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND—: American Heart Association (AHA) public policy advocacy strategies are based on its Strategic Impact Goals. The writing group appraised the evidence behind AHA’s policies to determine how well they address the association’s 2020 cardiovascular health (CVH) metrics and cardiovascular disease (CVD) management indicators and identified research needed to fill gaps in policy and support further policy development. METHODS AND RESULTS—: The AHA policy research department first identified current AHA policies specific to each CVH metric and CVD management indicator and the evidence underlying each policy. Writing group members then reviewed each policy and the related metrics and indicators. The results of each review were summarized, and topic-specific priorities and overarching themes for future policy research were proposed. There was generally close alignment between current AHA policies and the 2020 CVH metrics and CVD management indicators; however, certain specific policies still lack a robust evidence base. For CVH metrics, the distinction between policies for adults (age ≥20 years) and children (

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCirculation
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Apr 5 2016

Fingerprint

American Heart Association
Policy Making
Disease Management
Cardiovascular Diseases
Health
Consumer Advocacy
Research
Public Policy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology (medical)
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention (Accepted/In press). Evidence-Based Policy Making: Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000410

Evidence-Based Policy Making : Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association. / on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention.

In: Circulation, 05.04.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention 2016, 'Evidence-Based Policy Making: Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association', Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000410
on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention. Evidence-Based Policy Making: Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016 Apr 5. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000410
on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention. / Evidence-Based Policy Making : Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association. In: Circulation. 2016.
@article{9f26eb8d3ecc435aa92a80afb9d82b12,
title = "Evidence-Based Policy Making: Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association",
abstract = "BACKGROUND—: American Heart Association (AHA) public policy advocacy strategies are based on its Strategic Impact Goals. The writing group appraised the evidence behind AHA’s policies to determine how well they address the association’s 2020 cardiovascular health (CVH) metrics and cardiovascular disease (CVD) management indicators and identified research needed to fill gaps in policy and support further policy development. METHODS AND RESULTS—: The AHA policy research department first identified current AHA policies specific to each CVH metric and CVD management indicator and the evidence underlying each policy. Writing group members then reviewed each policy and the related metrics and indicators. The results of each review were summarized, and topic-specific priorities and overarching themes for future policy research were proposed. There was generally close alignment between current AHA policies and the 2020 CVH metrics and CVD management indicators; however, certain specific policies still lack a robust evidence base. For CVH metrics, the distinction between policies for adults (age ≥20 years) and children (",
author = "{on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Council on Functional Genomics and Translational Biology, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention} and Labarthe, {Darwin R.} and Goldstein, {Larry B.} and Antman, {Elliott M.} and Arnett, {Donna K.} and Fonarow, {Gregg C.} and Alberts, {Mark J.} and Hayman, {Laura L.} and Amit Khera and Sallis, {James F.} and Daniels, {Stephen R.} and Sacco, {Ralph L} and Suhui Li and Leighton Ku and Lantz, {Paula M.} and Robinson, {Jennifer G.} and Creager, {Mark A.} and {van Horn}, Linda and Penny Kris-Etherton and Aruni Bhatnagar and Whitsel, {Laurie P.}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "5",
doi = "10.1161/CIR.0000000000000410",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Circulation",
issn = "0009-7322",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evidence-Based Policy Making

T2 - Assessment of the American Heart Association’s Strategic Policy Portfolio: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association

AU - on behalf of the American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Hypertension, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Council o

AU - Labarthe, Darwin R.

AU - Goldstein, Larry B.

AU - Antman, Elliott M.

AU - Arnett, Donna K.

AU - Fonarow, Gregg C.

AU - Alberts, Mark J.

AU - Hayman, Laura L.

AU - Khera, Amit

AU - Sallis, James F.

AU - Daniels, Stephen R.

AU - Sacco, Ralph L

AU - Li, Suhui

AU - Ku, Leighton

AU - Lantz, Paula M.

AU - Robinson, Jennifer G.

AU - Creager, Mark A.

AU - van Horn, Linda

AU - Kris-Etherton, Penny

AU - Bhatnagar, Aruni

AU - Whitsel, Laurie P.

PY - 2016/4/5

Y1 - 2016/4/5

N2 - BACKGROUND—: American Heart Association (AHA) public policy advocacy strategies are based on its Strategic Impact Goals. The writing group appraised the evidence behind AHA’s policies to determine how well they address the association’s 2020 cardiovascular health (CVH) metrics and cardiovascular disease (CVD) management indicators and identified research needed to fill gaps in policy and support further policy development. METHODS AND RESULTS—: The AHA policy research department first identified current AHA policies specific to each CVH metric and CVD management indicator and the evidence underlying each policy. Writing group members then reviewed each policy and the related metrics and indicators. The results of each review were summarized, and topic-specific priorities and overarching themes for future policy research were proposed. There was generally close alignment between current AHA policies and the 2020 CVH metrics and CVD management indicators; however, certain specific policies still lack a robust evidence base. For CVH metrics, the distinction between policies for adults (age ≥20 years) and children (

AB - BACKGROUND—: American Heart Association (AHA) public policy advocacy strategies are based on its Strategic Impact Goals. The writing group appraised the evidence behind AHA’s policies to determine how well they address the association’s 2020 cardiovascular health (CVH) metrics and cardiovascular disease (CVD) management indicators and identified research needed to fill gaps in policy and support further policy development. METHODS AND RESULTS—: The AHA policy research department first identified current AHA policies specific to each CVH metric and CVD management indicator and the evidence underlying each policy. Writing group members then reviewed each policy and the related metrics and indicators. The results of each review were summarized, and topic-specific priorities and overarching themes for future policy research were proposed. There was generally close alignment between current AHA policies and the 2020 CVH metrics and CVD management indicators; however, certain specific policies still lack a robust evidence base. For CVH metrics, the distinction between policies for adults (age ≥20 years) and children (

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962437325&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84962437325&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000410

DO - 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000410

M3 - Article

C2 - 27045139

AN - SCOPUS:84962437325

JO - Circulation

JF - Circulation

SN - 0009-7322

ER -