Evidence & Policy最新文献

{"title":"Policy utilisation of occupational safety and health research: results from a tripartite unicameral parliamentary system in Denmark.","authors":"Charlotte Diana Nørregaard Rasmussen, Steffen Bohni Nielsen, Ole Henning Sørensen","doi":"10.1332/17442648Y2024D000000025","DOIUrl":"10.1332/17442648Y2024D000000025","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Use of research evidence in policy decisions is under-researched. Especially, there is a need for more research in countries with different forms of government than bicameral legislatures.</p><p><strong>Aims and objectives: </strong>This article examines the impact of occupational safety and health (OSH) research on decision-makers in a tripartite unicameral parliamentary system (legislature and agreements). More specifically, we identify and discuss information acquisition and types of research use in policy decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using both semi-structured and structured questions, we conducted 30 interviews distributed evenly within three groups of elite political actors: elected members of parliament; top-level public administrators; and social partner politicians. Analysis and reporting were subject to investigator triangulation.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The three groups of elite political actors acquire information about OSH issues from different sources. The most important are: interest groups, networks and internal specialists. Findings show that elite actors generally use research knowledge conceptually and instrumentally, and to a lesser degree strategically and tactically. Many types of information influence politicians. They mostly perceive themselves as initiators of new research. The social partners primarily perceive themselves as users of new research results to initiate change and influence political decisions.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>How and when research knowledge is used differs between the three groups. It is important for researchers to tailor research communication to the particular needs of different stakeholders and interact directly with the elite actors and indirectly through lower level specialists from stakeholder organisations, and gain exposure through external sources such as the press and social media.</p>","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"20 4","pages":"460-485"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144486979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cultivating 'communities of practice' to tackle civic policy challenges: insights from local government-academic collaboration in Leeds.","authors":"Nicola Carroll, Adam Crawford","doi":"10.1332/17442648Y2024D000000022","DOIUrl":"10.1332/17442648Y2024D000000022","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The academic impact agenda and evidence-informed policy movement have formed dynamic incentives for engagement between universities and local authorities. Yet, in the competitive higher education landscape, research-intensive universities frequently gravitate towards global rather than local impacts, while local government resources are diminished. In this context, how can universities and councils collaborate effectively to inform solutions to complex policy issues?</p><p><strong>Aims and objectives: </strong>This paper draws on data from a Review of Collaboration between researchers at the University of Leeds and officers at Leeds City Council, which explored factors that enable and constrain research-policy engagement. Where limitations of linear models of research-policy interaction are well documented, we consider how a 'community of practice' (CoP) approach might offer insights for accelerating civic knowledge exchange.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A CoP lens was applied in analysing data from a mapping exercise, survey and semi-structured interviews involving academics and council officers.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Examining research-policy engagement in terms of the 'domain', 'community' and 'practice' constituents of CoPs highlights the significance of interpersonal connections in forging 'boundary-crossing' collaborations that have spurred innovation in the city. Academics and officers commonly advocated enhanced inter-organisational processes whereby relationality is supported institutionally. Proposals are encapsulated in a model that conceptualises civic collaboration as a series of domain-specific CoPs supported by an inter-sectoral CoP performing vital 'boundary bridging' functions.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusions: </strong>Drawing on experiences from one English city, we advance a framework which offers promising insights into integration of organisational and relational facilitators of research-policy partnerships in responding to municipal policy challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"20 4","pages":"421-439"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144486978","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Breaking the Overton Window: on the need for adversarial co-production","authors":"Elliott Aidan Johnson, Irene Hardill, Matthew T. Johnson, Daniel Nettle","doi":"10.1332/17442648y2023d000000005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17442648y2023d000000005","url":null,"abstract":"Co-production has emerged as one of the key concepts in understanding knowledge-policy interactions and is associated with involvement, for example, of users of public services in their design and delivery. At a time of permacrisis, the need for transformative evidence-based policymaking is urgent and great. This is particularly important in highly distressed ‘left-behind’ communities targeted by the UK Government for Levelling Up, which constitutes an attempt to improve the infrastructural, economic, social and health outcomes of less affluent parts of the UK. Often, policymakers regard the transformative policies capable of addressing these crises as beyond the ‘Overton Window’, which describes a range of policies in the political centre that are acceptable to the public (Lehman, 2010). This window of opportunity can shift to encompass different policies, but movement is slow and policymakers generally believe that significant change lies outside. In this article, we build on recent debates in Evidence &amp; Policy on co-production by outlining an embryonic approach to overcoming this Overton Window-based roadblock in evidence-based policymaking: adversarial co-production, which involves working with opponents of evidence-based policy to develop means of persuading potential beneficiaries to support introduction. This emerging approach has been deployed in examination of public preferences with regard to welfare reform, but can be applied to a wide range of policy areas. We outline briefly the history of co-production, before setting out the process by which adversarial co-production was developed. We then describe the impact of adversarial co-production on public preferences on basic income (BI). This enables us to set out challenges and opportunities for those with an interest in addressing our crises, serving to stimulate genuine debate on longstanding assumptions about the limits of evidence-based policy and public opinion.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"55 12","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135366236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Examining research systems and models for local government: a systematic review","authors":"Emma S. Hock, Alison Scope, Andrew Booth","doi":"10.1332/17442648y2023d000000002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17442648y2023d000000002","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Local authorities (LA) are key in improving population health, and LA public health decision makers need support from appropriately organised research capacity; however, few models of LA research systems are known to exist. Aims and objectives: To explore potential and existing models of LA-based research systems. Methods: This mapping review and time-constrained systematic review synthesises conceptual and empirical literature from 12 health and social science databases, grey literature and reference/citation tracking. Three reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts of retrieved records, and extracted key data from included papers. Evidence was synthesised based on characteristics of research systems and quality-assessed for relevance, rigour and richness. Findings: Nine models were examined in depth. From these, we developed a typology of research systems. Few models were specifically designed for LA research activity; as a Whole System approach, the Local Authority Champions of Research model offers a potential blueprint. Useful lessons may be learned from UK Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research, Academic Collaborative Centres in the Netherlands, local Research and Development units in Sweden, and generic University-Community partnerships. Discussion and conclusions: An optimal research system requires the coexistence of multiple systems including Centre, Partnership, Collaboration, Network and Community types. The review is UK-focused, but the models appear to have wider relevance. Our classification offers those planning an LA research system the opportunity to choose an approach that meets their requirements and resources. A Whole System approach is optimal, with egalitarian input from the LA and academia.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"163 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135942951","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The critical factors in producing high quality and policy-relevant research: insights from international behavioural science units","authors":"Jan Lecouturier, Ivo Vlaev, Paul Chadwick, Angel M. Chater, Michael P. Kelly, Louis Goffe, Carly Meyer, Mei Yee Tang, Vivi Antonopoulou, Fiona Graham, Falko F. Sniehotta","doi":"10.1332/17442648y2023d000000001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17442648y2023d000000001","url":null,"abstract":"Background: There has been a rapid increase in the number of, and demand for, organisations offering behavioural science advice to government over the last ten years. Yet we know little of the state of science and the experiences of these evidence providers. Aims and objectives: To identify current practice in this emerging field and the factors that impact on the production of high-quality and policy-relevant research. Methods: A qualitative study using one-to-one interviews with representatives from a purposeful sample of 15 units in the vanguard of international behavioural science research in policy. The data were analysed thematically. Findings: Relationships with policymakers were important in the inception of units, research conduct, implementation and dissemination of findings. Knowledge exchange facilitated a shared understanding of policy issues/context, and of behavioural science. Sufficient funding was crucial to maintain critical capacity in the units’ workforces, build a research portfolio beneficial to policymakers and the units, and to ensure full and transparent dissemination. Discussion and conclusion: Findings highlight the positive impact of strong evidence-provider/user relationships and the importance of governments’ commitment to co-produced research programmes to address policy problems and transparency in the dissemination of methods and findings. From the findings we have created a framework, ‘STEPS’ (Sharing, Transparency, Engagement, Partnership, Strong relationships), of five recommendations for units working with policymakers. These findings will be of value to all researchers conducting research on behalf of government.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135489866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Experiences and perceptions of evidence use among senior health service decision makers in Ireland: a qualitative study","authors":"Susan Calnan, Sheena McHugh","doi":"10.1332/174426421x16917571241005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16917571241005","url":null,"abstract":"Background: To support evidence-informed decision making in a health service context, there is a need to better understand the contextual challenges regarding evidence use. Aims and objectives: To examine experiences of evidence use and perceived barriers, facilitators and recommended strategies to increase research use among senior decision makers in the national health service in Ireland. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with decision makers in Ireland’s national health service (n= 17) from August 2021 to January 2022. Criterion sampling was used (division in the organisation and grade of position), and interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Barriers and facilitators were mapped according to multiple-level categories (individual, organisational, research, social, economic, political) identified in the literature. Findings: Health service decision makers described a blended and often reactive approach to using evidence; the type and source of evidence used depended on the issue at hand. Barriers and facilitators to research use manifested at multiple levels, including the individual (time); organisational (culture, access to research, resources, skills); research (relevance, quality); and social, economic and political levels (external links with universities, funding, political will). Strategies recommended by participants to enhance evidence-informed decision making included synthesising key messages from the research, strengthening links with universities, and fostering more embedded research. Discussion and conclusion: Evidence use in health service contexts is a dynamic process with multiple drivers. This study underlines the need for a multilevel approach to support research use in health services, including strategies targeted at less tangible elements such as the organisational culture regarding research.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"357 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135489857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Understanding brokers, intermediaries, and boundary spanners: a multi-sectoral review of strategies, skills, and outcomes","authors":"Jennifer Watling Neal, Stephen Posner, Brian Brutzman","doi":"10.1332/174426421x16328416007542","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16328416007542","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Brokers, intermediaries, and boundary spanners (BIBS) bridge research and policy or practice, and can elevate the role of evidence in decision making. However, there is limited integration of the literature across different sectors to understand the strategies that BIBS use, the skills needed to carry out these strategies, and the expected outcomes of these strategies. Aims and objectives: In this review, we characterise the strategies, skills, and outcomes of BIBS across the literature in education, environmental, health and other relevant sectors. Methods: We included 185 conceptual and review papers written in English that included descriptions or conceptualisations of BIBS in the context of knowledge transfer or research use in the education, environmental, health, or other relevant sectors (for example, social services, international development). For each included paper, we extracted and coded information on sector, BIBS strategies, skills, and outcomes. Findings: Our review revealed five strategies used by BIBS that were emphasised in the literature. Specifically, 79.5% of papers mentioned facilitating relationships, 75.7% mentioned disseminating evidence, 56.8% mentioned finding alignment, 48.6% mentioned capacity building, and 37.3% mentioned advising decisions as strategies used by BIBS. Additionally, papers described skills and expected outcomes that were common across these strategies as well as those that were unique to specific strategies. Discussion and conclusions: We discuss implications of these findings for understanding how BIBS interface with knowledge users and producers as well as directions for future research on BIBS and the professionalisation of BIBS roles.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135450240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Knowledge Brokerage: The Musical: an analogy for explaining the role of knowledge brokers in a university setting","authors":"Megan Auld, Emmah Doig, S. Bennett","doi":"10.1332/174426421x16397424861558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16397424861558","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Knowledge brokers in higher education are described as requiring a broad range of skills and characteristics, leading to both role conflict and ambiguity. Although existing studies report broad concepts regarding the role of knowledge brokers, the activities that they actually perform to broker knowledge are not systematically reported or impact evaluated.Aims and objectives: This paper aims to summarise the current literature on the role of knowledge brokers and describe this role in a higher education context. In an exploratory study, as two knowledge brokers we recorded our activities within a school of health in a large university setting using the Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change (ERIC) categories over a period of nine months. Using this report, we use the analogy of a musical to translate the role of knowledge broker. Considering the knowledge brokerage roles of musical director, set designer, choreographer, costume designer and sound and lighting, we discuss the impact of knowledge brokerage activities on actors relaying their knowledge story to an end-user audience. Knowledge brokers in the higher education context primarily perform activities in four areas: know your cast and crew; train your cast and crew; rehearse and review; and provide hands-on support.Key conclusions: Understanding the role of knowledge brokers may be enhanced by using the analogy of a musical. Due to the diverse nature of these roles, it is recommended that knowledge brokerage in higher education is performed in teams, where knowledge brokers can utilise different skill sets to facilitate their work.Key messagesTo date the role of knowledge brokers in higher education has been poorly defined.In practice, the role is building relationships, training, reviewing and providing hands-on support.The musical analogy helps explain knowledge broker roles as director, choreographer and set designer.Due to the diverse nature of knowledge broker roles, teamwork is recommended.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66287353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"National objectives, local policymaking: public health efforts to translate national legislation into local policy in Scottish alcohol licensing","authors":"N. Fitzgerald, P. Cairney","doi":"10.1332/174426421x16397418342227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16397418342227","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Policymaking environments are multi-centric by necessity and design. Alcohol premises licensing is governed by Scottish legislation, which also allows for local autonomy.Aims and objectives: To describe the obstacles faced by local public health actors in seeking to influence the alcohol premises licensing system in Scotland as an example of local advocacy efforts in multi-centric policymaking.Methods: Snowball sampling identified and recruited 12 public health actors who were actively seeking to influence alcohol premises licensing, along with a national key informant. In-depth interviews (n=13) discussed challenges experienced and perceptions of best strategies for success. Interviews (69m average) were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using an inductive framework approach.Findings: Most interviewees operated in local premises licensing arenas, influencing national legislation only through intermediaries. Challenges to engagement included: unfamiliar conventions, stakeholders and decision-making cultures, resources, data gaps, and licensing boards’ prioritisation of economic growth. Their preferred solution was a strengthening of national legislation to constrain local autonomy, but they adapted their strategies to the challenges faced.Discussion and conclusion: The adoption of a particular objective in national government (a public health objective for alcohol licensing) may not remove the need for effective local advocacy in a multi-centric system. Local policymakers have their own conventions, processes and views on evidence, and successful advocacy may involve diverse strategies and relationship building over time. Practitioners advocating policy change may benefit from a better understanding of prior research on how to bring about such change; scholars of such processes could better engage with this audience.Key messagesA commitment to a policy outcome in national legislation does not guarantee success at local level.In multi-centric policymaking, advocacy is needed at different policy levels.The case of alcohol premises licensing illustrates how different policy centres have their own conventions and priorities.Public health actors described challenges in and bespoke strategies for engaging in their local licensing systems.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66287323","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Using Forum Theatre to mobilise knowledge and improve NHS care: the Enhancing Post-injury Psychological Intervention and Care (EPPIC) study","authors":"K. Beckett, T. Deave, T. McBride, A. May, J. Gabbay, Urszula Kapoulas, Adele Long, George A. Warburton, C. Wogan, L. Cox, Julian Thompson, Frank Spencer, D. Kendrick","doi":"10.1332/174426421x16420902769508","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16420902769508","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Evidence regarding the impact of psychological problems on recovery from injury has limited influence on practice. Mindlines show effective practice requires diverse knowledge which is generally socially transmitted.Aims and objectives: Develop and test a method blending patient, practitioner, and research evidence and using Forum Theatre to enable key stakeholders to interact with it. Assess this methods; impact on contributing individuals/groups; on behaviour, practice, and research; mechanisms enabling these changes to occur.Methods: Stage-1: captured patient (n=53), practitioner (n=62), and research/expert (n=3) evidence using interviews, focus groups, literature review; combined these strands using framework analysis and conveyed them in a play. Stage-2: patients (n=32), carers (n=3), practitioners (n=31), and researchers (n=16) attended Forum Theatre workshops where they shared experiences, watched the play, re-enacted elements, and co-produced service improvements. Stage-3: used the Social Impact Framework to analyse study outcome data and establish what changed, how and why.Findings: This approach enhanced individuals’/group knowledge of post-injury psychopathology, confidence in their knowledge, mutual understanding, creativity, attitudes towards knowledge mobilisation, and research. These cognitive, attitudinal, and relational impacts led to multilevel changes in behaviour, practice, and research. Four key mechanisms enabled this research to occur and create impact: diverse knowledge, drama/storytelling, social interaction, actively altering outcomes.Discussion and conclusions: Discourse about poor uptake of scientific evidence focuses on methods to aid translation and implementation; this study shows how mindlines can reframe this ‘problem’ and inform impactful research.EPPIC demonstrated how productive interaction between diverse stakeholders using creative means bridges gaps between evidence, knowledge, and action.Key messagesImproving healthcare practice by means of research can be problematic.Knowledge translation models often neglect healthcare’s complexity and gaps between evidence, knowledge and action.The mindlines model shows how diverse healthcare knowledge is effectively melded, used, and transmitted.Forum Theatre enables key stakeholders to share and co-create knowledge, enhancing mindlines and hence practice.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66287508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}