Use of research evidence in U.S. state child abuse and neglect policies: 2019–2024

Background: Child abuse and neglect (CAN) inflicts long-term costs on both individuals and society, yet little is known about how state-level legislation incorporates research evidence to address CAN. Objective: The study examined bill- and state-level factors for association with the use of research evidence (URE) in CAN-related legislation. Participants and setting: CAN-related state legislation introduced between 2019 and 2024 (N = 27,703). Methods: Using multilevel mixed effects modeling, we assessed how bill-level (e.g., bipartisan sponsorship) and state-level (e.g., policy innovativeness) factors predicted the presence of research language in legislation. We also evaluated whether enacted bills were more likely to contain research language. Results: Policy innovativeness (OR = 1.18, 95% CI [1.02,1.35]), an interaction between policy innovativeness and GSP per capita (OR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.06,1.33]), sponsor/cosponsor count (OR = 1.01, 95% CI [1.00,1.01]), bipartisan (co)sponsorship (OR = 1.30, 95% CI [1.18,1.43]), substance use disorder language (OR = 12.10, 95% CI [10.60,13.90]), social determinants of health language (OR = 6.07, 95% CI [5.28,6.98]), COVID-19 time period (OR = 1.10, 95% CI [1.06,1.14]), and enactment status (OR = 1.27, 95% CI [1.19,1.37]) all significantly predicted increased odds of research language inclusion in bills. Research and development expenditures predicted lower odds (OR = 0.84, 95% CI [0.70,0.997]) of research language inclusion. Conclusions: Both bill- and state-level factors influence the presence of research language in CAN-related legislation, highlighting the ways that contextual factors may promote evidence-based policymaking. Promoting evidence-based policymaking can help address CAN, reduce CAN rates, and further the reach of CAN-related research.