Assessing societal impacts of research is more difficult than assessing advances in knowledge. Methods to evaluate research impact on policy processes and outcomes are especially underdeveloped, and are needed to optimize the influence of research on policy for addressing complex issues such as chronic diseases. Contribution analysis (CA), a theory-based approach to evaluation, holds promise under these conditions of complexity. Yet applications of CA for this purpose are limited, and methods are needed to strengthen contribution claims and ensure CA is practical to implement. This article reports the experience of a public health research center in Canada that applied CA to evaluate the impacts of its research on policy changes. The main goal was to experiment with methods that were relevant to CA objectives, sufficiently rigorous for making credible claims, and feasible. Methods were ‘good enough’ if they achieved all three attributes. Three cases on government policy in tobacco control were examined: creation of smoke-free multiunit dwellings, creation of smoke-free outdoor spaces, and regulation of flavored tobacco products. Getting to ‘good enough’ required careful selection of nested theories of change; strategic use of social science theories, as well as quantitative and qualitative data from diverse sources; and complementary methods to assemble and analyze evidence for testing the nested theories of change. Some methods reinforced existing good practice standards for CA, and others were adaptations or extensions of them. Our experience may inform efforts to influence policy with research, evaluate research impacts on policy using CA, and apply CA more broadly.

中文翻译：

---

使用贡献分析来评估研究对政策的影响：“足够好”

评估研究的社会影响比评估知识进步更加困难。评估研究对政策过程和结果的影响的方法尤其不完善，需要使用这些方法来优化研究对解决诸如慢性病等复杂问题的政策的影响。贡献分析（CA）是一种基于理论的评估方法，在这种复杂性条件下具有广阔的前景。然而，CA为此目的的应用受到了限制，并且需要一些方法来加强缴费声明并确保CA切实可行地实施。本文报告了加拿大公共卫生研究中心的经验，该中心应用CA评估了其研究对政策变化的影响。主要目标是试验与CA目标相关的方法，足以提出可信的主张，并且切实可行。如果方法具有所有三个属性，则它们“足够好”。审查了政府控制烟草政策的三个案例：创建无烟的多户住宅，创建无烟的户外空间以及对调味烟制品进行监管。要达到“足够好”的水平，就需要仔细选择嵌套的变革理论。战略性地使用社会科学理论以及来自各种来源的定量和定性数据；以及补充方法来收集和分析证据以测试嵌套的变化理论。一些方法加强了CA的现有良好实践标准，而另一些则是对它们的改编或扩展。我们的经验可能会为努力通过研究影响政策，使用CA评估研究对政策的影响提供帮助，