Finding a “common ground” to build the field of public health law research

Researchers have been conducting evaluations of laws that impact population health for many years with considerable variation in methodological rigor. Starting with a group of 7,158 peer-reviewed articles authored by known public health law researchers between 1985 and 2012, we systematically reviewed abstracts to determine whether each article reported on an empirical study that assessed the impact of specific laws and regulations on public health. We assessed the articles for health topic, type of law, key variables, method of analysis and conclusion regarding effect of the law. The evaluation revealed several limitations that must be addressed in order to advance the field of public health law research and the use of evidence to drive policy development. One limitation was a lack of precise measurement of the law – dichotomous variables rather than measurement of individual provisions of the law. Technological advances are helping to more precisely measure laws over time in a systematic and replicable manner. A second limitation was the lack of clearly defined mediators and/or moderators through which the law works, resulting in misspecification of the hypothesized relationship. Integration of theory from other disciplines is helping to better understand the process through which law drives change. The creation of a multidisciplinary “common ground” which allows investigators to continue to identify as a researcher of a particular public health issue (tobacco, transportation, injury, etc) yet participate in an ongoing dialogue to advance evaluation of public health laws is essential the sustainability of the field of public health law research.