Evidence update: How are America’s children faring?

As a society, we put a tremendous value on the health, well-being and education of our children. But how do we know how they are doing?

Each year, the U.S. government publishes a report – America’s Children in Brief: Key National Indicators of Well-Being – that combines the data from 22 federal agencies to provide a reader-friendly, evidence-based account of the status of children in the U.S.

This year’s report unveils some interesting trends:

  • Preterm births declined for the fourth straight year. And fewer children died in the first year of life.
  • Average mathematics scores increased for 4th and 8th grade students,
  • The percentage of children living in poverty increased, and the percentage of children with at least one parent employed full time, year-round decreased,.
  • Fewer you were victims of violent crimes last year
  • Fewer young children lived in a home where someone smoked.

You can get the full story at http://www.childstats.gov.

The science of political campaigns

The 2012 presidential candidates will spend billions of dollars to encourage people to vote for them this year.  Independent analysts currently estimate that President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney will spend more than $6 billion in their campaigns. But how do they really know that money will bring them votes?

It turns out there is an emerging cadre of researchers using scientific techniques – specifically the randomized controlled trial – to find out which campaign strategies actually bring people to the polls.

Among them are Todd Rogers, a behavioral psychologist at Harvard University, and David Nickerson, a political science professor at the University of Notre Dame. Together, they conducted a study in the 2008 Democratic primary in Pennsylvania that attempted to determine whether get-out-the-vote reminder calls made a significant difference in voter turnout.

For the study, Rogers came up with some questions that would ask people about their plans on voting day such as “What do you think you’ll be doing before you head to the polls on Tuesday?” and “Where do you think you’ll be coming from that day?” His theory – based cognitive psychology principles – was that these questions would plant a seed voters’ minds to helps them remember to vote.

The researchers used the questions in a randomized controlled trial. Some citizens received phone calls asking the questions, others received the standard get-out-the-vote call and others did not receive a phone call. They found a dramatic result: People who were asked the planning questions were twice as likely to vote as people who were not.

There are other examples of scientific studies applied to campaign strategies. Rogers and a colleague at Yale University found evidence that messages which tell people high turnout is expected are more effective at motivating voters than messages which emphasize low voter turnout.

And a review of field studies in get-out-the-vote campaigns found that many of these strategies improve voter turnout, but tend to mobilize well-represented groups of people and miss under-represented groups – effectively widening disparities in the electorate.

Here at EBL, we think it is great news that social scientists are applying scientific methods to the art of political campaigning – especially where so much money is involved. And we hope it’s information that candidates use in their campaigns.

Disney takes its cues from the evidence

In major news this week, the Walt Disney Co. banned the advertising of junk foods from its television, radio and Internet programming. Under the new guidelines, advertisers who want to promote food and beverages on Disney programming for children must meet guidelines on serving size, calories, and fat and sugar content.

While it’s inspiring that such a large company is interested in promoting health among kids, I was even more inspired that Disney created a policy based on real evidence. Because, in fact, there is a growing body of evidence that links media consumption – and specifically advertisements – with negative health outcomes for children.

This systematic review, for example, looked at 173 studies examining the relationship between media consumption and health outcomes among children. In 80 percent of the studies, more media exposure was associated with a negative health outcome, and childhood obesity had the strongest correlation. This analysis considered the quantity of media that children watched, but not the content.

Another meta-analysis found a significant association between the proportion of children overweight and the number commercials per hour on children’s television, especially ads that promoting junk foods. The study used data from surveys of advertising on children’s television and estimates of the prevalence of overweight among children, in the U.S., Australia and eight European countries. It concluded the quantity and content of advertising on children’s television programs has a specific effect on children.

It’s great to see a major company taking cues from the evidence in an effort to improve the health of children!

BPA: The answer is in the details

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration decided not to ban the chemical bisphenol A, also known as BPA, in food packaging last week. The decision may seem like a surprising one since so many water bottles and serving utensils are sold as “BPA-free.” So let’s look at the evidence behind their decision.

National Public Radio offered a good overview of the evidence available on the health effect of BPA. The story noted that evidence from government agencies typically weighs heavier in FDA decisions.

One worry with other studies in contamination – BPA accidentally getting into the blood after samples are drawn. Some studies have found high levels of BPA in the blood. But these studies used samples collected in hospitals or doctors’ offices, not research settings and did not include a common test to detect contamination.

One study performed by government scientists involved feeding 20 adults a diet high in BPA from packaged foods for a day, and then measuring how much of it ended up in their blood.  At the end of the day, there wasn’t enough BPA in participants’ blood to measure.

That’s because the human body can he human body can actually inactivate dangerous chemicals like BPA in the intestine and liver, Justin Teeguarden, a toxicologist at the Pacific Northwest National Lab who conducted the study, told NPR.  Contamination was also an issue in this study, but the researchers tested for it and overcame it, he said.

Other government studies found that very little BPA is transferred to a nursing mother’s breast milk, and that  newborn monkeys are able to inactivate BPA just like human adults. (Researchers aren’t able to conduct studies on newborn babies.)

While the evidence does not show that BPA is completely safe, the FDA found that the low levels of BPA that humans are safe.

As for me, I’m still going to avoid BPA when I can. With the pressure on companies to remove from their products, there are plenty of BPA-free alternatives available, especially for kids. Any other BPA from canned food or juice containers, I’m not going to worry about for the moment.

A clearinghouse of education evidence

Parents across the nation send their children to public schools with the confidence that principals and teachers are providing an environment where children can learn, grow and thrive.

We hear so much about in the news about ways to improve our education system – especially in this presidential election year, when candidates are offering proposals and counter-proposals to fix our schools.

But is there any evidence as to what really works?  As a parent of young children, our schools are one important place where I want to see evidence-based guidelines put in place.

The best place I’ve found for evidence-based information on education is called the What Works Clearinghouse, an initiative by the U.S. Department of Education that conducts systematic reviews on education research to provide educators with the information they need to make evidence-based decisions.

The project is a true treasure trove of information, with research reviews on a myriad of topics including dropout prevention, school choice, early childhood education and student behavior, to name just a few.

On a recent cruise through the site, several topics piqued my interested including:

I’m certainly going to share this amazing resource with my son’s teachers, and use to gather information about the curriculums he’ll be learning in elementary school.  As a parent, it’s a relief to know there’s a place to look for reliable, evidence-based information on education.

Beware of pet turtles

They’re small, they’re cute and they seem harmless. But many pet turtles are illegal, and they can be a dangerous addition to your home. In fact, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control believes that pet turtles are the source of a salmonella outbreak among kids.

Since 1975, it’s been illegal to own a small turtle – with a shell less than 4 inches long – as a pet. (They are allow

ed for scientific and educational purposes only.)  That’s because they’re a recognized source of human Salmonella infections – a food poisoning that can be especially dangerous for small children.

Over the past year, there were 132 cases of Salmonella infections reported in 18 states, and the patients’ median age was 6 years old. Fifty-six of these patients who were interviewed by public health officials. Of them, 36 reported turtle exposure. In addition, five samples of turtle tank water from patient homes tested positive for the outbreak strain.

The take-home message: Small turtles are not suitable pets, and there is evidence that suggests they cause serious food poisoning among their owners, and especially children.

Stuck in a jam? The science behind traffic

?  So a recent story in the Washington Post about the science of traffic piqued my interest.  It turns out (of course!) there’s an entire field of study around alleviating traffic problems that spans city planning, human behavior and health topics.

There are mathematical models that explain why traffic slows for seemingly no reason at all.  (It turns out these traffic jams are self-sustaining waves, similar to the detonation waves produced by explosions.

Another study has found that it’s actually the rate of merging that contributions to slow-downs on freeways, instead of the capacity of the road.

While there’s much evidence on the causes of traffic congestion, research has pointed to proven solution to solve the problem. But it’s good to know that scientists are working on it.

On a related note, there  is plenty of evidence available on the topic of preventing traffic accidents that lead to injury or death. The Cochrane Collaboration has put together a list of systematic review on various methods to reduce injuries and deaths caused by cars and trucks.  Among them:

Solving issues related to traffic congestion and accidents is just another area where it pays to consult the research.

More evidence supporting the systematic review

Frequent EBL readers are well aware of the importance we put on systematic reviews, studies that synthesize many articles on a given topic and draw a conclusion about what the body of evidence shows.

So we were excited this week to stumble across a paper funded by the Milbank Memorial Fund and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control extolling the virtues of the systematic review for improving health across populations – especially for our policymakers.

The paper includes case studies on a wide range of topics — underage drinking, tobacco use and traffic safety interventions, to name a few.

And it draws the following conclusions about systematic reviews, in general:

  • Policymakers should feel confident about the findings of systematic reviews because, by definition, they help reduce the bias often present in single studies.
  • Systematic reviews help policymakers work efficiently and reduce the influence of outside interests.
  • Researchers in all fields must make strategic efforts to publicize and implement review findings. (Here at EBL, we’re doing our best in this area!)
  • Enhancing the “literacy” of decision makers and the public about the strengths and weaknesses of different types of evidence can help improve population health policy.

So there you have it: More evidence in support of the systematic review.  The next time you’re thinking about making a health decision, considering checking the body of evidence. Just Google “systematic review” along with the topic you’re interested in and see what you can find.

The facts on honey

It’s sticky, it’s sweet and it tastes wonderful on a warm biscuit. Honey is a natural sweeter that’s been that provides a natural form of instant energy. And it’s been used for centuries as an antibacterial agent.

Now new evidence from the Food Safety News shows that the majority of honey available in U.S. grocery stores is missing the pollen, which would lead it to fail quality standards set by many of the world’s food safety agencies.

The pollen in honey serves several purposes. It provides some nutritional benefits, it is thought to help minimize seasonal allergies, and it helps food safety officials track where the honey is from.

The pollen is removed from honey using a technique called ultra filtering, where honey is heated, sometimes watered down and then forced at high pressure through extremely small filters to remove pollen.

There’s no way to tell whether ultra-filtered honey is coming from an unsafe source.  In the past, some imported honey was found to contain high levels of antibiotics and heavy metals.

The take-home message: Do your best to buy honey from a known local source, such as a farmer’s market or cooperative grocery store.

As a sidenote, Cornell happens to be one of the nation’s leading resources for information about honey bees. It houses the largest and most comprehensive apiculture library in the world as well as the Dyce Laboratory for Honey Bee Studies.

The real story on unemployment

Since late in 2007, people across the globe have been coping with an economic downturn that’s led to decreased house values, falling stock prices and higher unemployment rates. The financial crisis has impacted people across the world in different ways.

In the United States, unemployment has been especially troublesome.  And a new report from the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey Institute details exactly who has been hit the hardest.

Although all groups of Americans have experienced rising unemployment, increases have been significantly larger for men, young adults, the least educated, and single parents.

The report shows that unemployment has rose more in central cities and suburban places than in rural places, most likely because rural unemployment was already high prior to the start of the recession.

Rural areas have continued to suffer from the highest unemployment rates for unmarried people. Single fathers in rural areas registered the single larg­est increase in unemployment throughout the recession, rising almost 11 percentage points to 23 percent in 2010.

Young adults who finished high school since 2007 have been some of the hardest hit.

“This is particularly disturbing in that not only are these youths losing income in the short term, but may also suffer from long-term ‘scarring’ in terms of lost wages,” the report says. “In most cases, unemployment was high among the young and less-educated groups in 2007, only to increase rapidly by 2010.”

The report used data from the Annual Social and Economic Supplement of the Current Population Survey, a monthly survey of about 50,000 households conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Evidence-based energy: What we really know about hydraulic fracturing

A newer method for extracting natural gas from layers of shale deep below the earth’s surface – called hydraulic fracturing or hydrofracking – has ignited debates across the nation. Proponents say that natural gas key to the country’s energy future. (Burning natural gas produces fewer greenhouse gases emissions than coal and oil.) But opponents say this method for extracting it poses risks to ground water supplies.

Over the past several years, Cornell researchers have mounted an unprecedented response to the issue. They’ve stepped up research efforts to collect and develop as much evidence as possible about hydrofracking. And they are reaching out to help individuals and communities across New York to help them make decisions about the benefits and dangers of drilling.

They have created the Cornell Cooperative Extension Natural Gas Resource Center, which is made of a 12 faculty members from a wide array of disciplines—including sociology, environmental sciences, and geology—and 20 extension educators. The group has compiled information for people impacted by hydraulic fracturing including individuals considering leasing their land, community groups, and local governments.

The Resource Center’s web site is a treasure trove of information on the topic including how geologists use seismic data to determine if natural gas is accessible, how to negotiate a lease for gas drilling and the economic impacts of drilling.

If you live in an area where natural gas drilling is a possibility, you’ll definitely want to dig into this resource.

A move toward evidence-based criminal justice

Earlier this month, the state of Illinois abolished its death penalty, the fourth state in the U.S. to remove the sentence in the past decade.  Among public leaders, consensus has grown slowly to support the decision not due to questions of morality, but of accuracy. Since 1973, nearly 140 death row inmates across the nation have been found innocent and released from prison before they were executed. 

Case reviews have found some common reasons why inmates are wrongfully-convicted such as eyewitness error, police and prosecutor misconduct, mishandled evidence, faculty testimony by another inmate in exchange for a reduced sentence and false confessions.

The increasing awareness that our criminal justice system doesn’t always get it right has spurred universities and non-profits across the country to reopen investigations for inmates who claim their innocent.  Cornell’s own Death Penalty Project is among the groups that work on such cases.

Maybe more importantly, publicity about wrongful conviction cases has created a movement toward evidence-based crime policy – using research on criminal justice issues to put policies into place that help to ensure our criminal justice system gets it right the first time around. For example, one systematic review of eyewitness testimony procedures found that high levels of stress negatively impact the accuracy of eye-witness testimony.

Researchers at the College of Human Ecology have partnered with Cornell faculty members in psychology and law to conduct basic research on some of these topics relevant to these issues including false memory, child testimony and jury decision-making and offer classes to students interested in this type of research.

The Campbell Collaboration – a clearinghouse for systematic reviews on social policy issues – has a crime and justice group that is working to broaden the information available on criminal justice issues. And other institutions, such as George Mason University, have created centers aimed at translating this research into policies and practices that local law enforcement officials are use in the field.

It’s a good start on a topic that should be pursued vigorously until changes are made.  In many cases our police officers, judges and juries are making life-or-death decisions about people’s lives.  If there’s ever a time to rely on evidence-based practices, this is it.

Skip to toolbar