David Bewley-Taylor , Matthew Wall , Jack Tudor , Alison Ritter
{"title":"比较药物政策:全球药物政策指数的效度和信度评估","authors":"David Bewley-Taylor , Matthew Wall , Jack Tudor , Alison Ritter","doi":"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The Global Drug Policy Index (GDPI) is an instrument that attempts to comparatively evaluate national drug policies at a global scale. This paper assesses the validity and reliability of this new Index, speaking to the wider question of whether such a comparative evaluation can be achieved in a methodologically robust manner.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>We review the validity of the Index through analysis of the conceptual logic of the GDPI. Construct validity is assessed using Cronbach’s alpha statistics alongside exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The reliability of the Index is assessed using uncertainty analysis where we systematically analyse how Index rankings vary across simulations with randomly perturbed weighting schemes. In addition, we explore the reliability of experts’ assessment of policy implementation, reporting on a common vignette undertaken by all country-expert evaluators.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The analysis of conceptual validity is a reproduction of the logic supporting the contention that the project’s underpinning normative document (a report produced by the UN system coordination Task Team on the Implementation of the UN System Common Position on drug-related matters) represents a solid starting point of what will be a sustained, iterative research process to develop a valid conceptual and operational basis for comparative evaluation of national drug policies. The empirical analysis of construct validity reveals that operationalising the Common Position creates a set of variables with a coherent multidimensional structure that is amenable to aggregation into an overall index. While the performance of states under simulations of different weighting schemes was highly consistent, country expert evaluation in developing state codes on policy implementation can be inconsistent, even when they are provided with a common description designed to capture variance on their rating scale. Cronbach’s alpha indicates that the variables encompassed by the GDPI measure a coherent construct, while EFA results provide support for three of the <em>a priori</em> dimensions used in the creation of the Index.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We conclude that the GDPI project demonstrates that robust comparative evaluation of drug policy at a global scale is possible. However, we also reveal that this project will necessarily be subject to continuous refinement – especially when it comes to standardising expert country evaluations. We outline practical challenges and suggestions for future work in this direction.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48364,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Drug Policy","volume":"143 ","pages":"Article 104908"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing drug policies: An assessment of the validity and reliability of the global drug policy index\",\"authors\":\"David Bewley-Taylor , Matthew Wall , Jack Tudor , Alison Ritter\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104908\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The Global Drug Policy Index (GDPI) is an instrument that attempts to comparatively evaluate national drug policies at a global scale. This paper assesses the validity and reliability of this new Index, speaking to the wider question of whether such a comparative evaluation can be achieved in a methodologically robust manner.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>We review the validity of the Index through analysis of the conceptual logic of the GDPI. Construct validity is assessed using Cronbach’s alpha statistics alongside exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The reliability of the Index is assessed using uncertainty analysis where we systematically analyse how Index rankings vary across simulations with randomly perturbed weighting schemes. In addition, we explore the reliability of experts’ assessment of policy implementation, reporting on a common vignette undertaken by all country-expert evaluators.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The analysis of conceptual validity is a reproduction of the logic supporting the contention that the project’s underpinning normative document (a report produced by the UN system coordination Task Team on the Implementation of the UN System Common Position on drug-related matters) represents a solid starting point of what will be a sustained, iterative research process to develop a valid conceptual and operational basis for comparative evaluation of national drug policies. The empirical analysis of construct validity reveals that operationalising the Common Position creates a set of variables with a coherent multidimensional structure that is amenable to aggregation into an overall index. While the performance of states under simulations of different weighting schemes was highly consistent, country expert evaluation in developing state codes on policy implementation can be inconsistent, even when they are provided with a common description designed to capture variance on their rating scale. Cronbach’s alpha indicates that the variables encompassed by the GDPI measure a coherent construct, while EFA results provide support for three of the <em>a priori</em> dimensions used in the creation of the Index.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We conclude that the GDPI project demonstrates that robust comparative evaluation of drug policy at a global scale is possible. However, we also reveal that this project will necessarily be subject to continuous refinement – especially when it comes to standardising expert country evaluations. We outline practical challenges and suggestions for future work in this direction.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Drug Policy\",\"volume\":\"143 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104908\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Drug Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395925002087\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Drug Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395925002087","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
全球毒品政策指数(Global Drug Policy Index, GDPI)是一种在全球范围内比较评价各国毒品政策的工具。本文对这一新指数的有效性和可靠性进行了评估,讨论了一个更广泛的问题,即这种比较评估是否可以在方法上可靠地实现。方法通过分析gdp的概念逻辑,对该指数的有效性进行评价。结构效度评估使用Cronbach 's alpha统计和探索性因子分析(EFA)。使用不确定性分析评估指数的可靠性,我们系统地分析了指数排名如何在随机扰动加权方案的模拟中变化。此外,我们还探讨了专家对政策实施评估的可靠性,报告了所有国家专家评估人员所进行的共同小插曲。结果对概念有效性的分析是支持以下论点的逻辑的再现:该项目的基础规范性文件(联合国系统关于执行联合国系统关于毒品相关事项的共同立场的协调工作队编写的一份报告)是一个坚实的起点,它将是一个持续的、反复的研究过程,为国家毒品政策的比较评价建立一个有效的概念和操作基础。构造有效性的实证分析表明,共同位置的操作创建了一组具有连贯多维结构的变量,可以聚合成一个整体指数。虽然各国在不同加权方案的模拟下的表现是高度一致的,但国家专家在制定国家政策执行代码时的评价可能不一致,即使提供了旨在捕捉其评级量表差异的共同描述。Cronbach’s alpha表明,gdp所包含的变量衡量的是一个连贯的结构,而全民教育的结果为创建指数时使用的三个先验维度提供了支持。我们的结论是,gdp pi项目表明,在全球范围内对药物政策进行强有力的比较评估是可能的。然而,我们也揭示了这个项目必然会受到不断改进的影响——特别是在标准化专家国家评估方面。我们概述了在这个方向上未来工作的实际挑战和建议。
Comparing drug policies: An assessment of the validity and reliability of the global drug policy index
Background
The Global Drug Policy Index (GDPI) is an instrument that attempts to comparatively evaluate national drug policies at a global scale. This paper assesses the validity and reliability of this new Index, speaking to the wider question of whether such a comparative evaluation can be achieved in a methodologically robust manner.
Method
We review the validity of the Index through analysis of the conceptual logic of the GDPI. Construct validity is assessed using Cronbach’s alpha statistics alongside exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The reliability of the Index is assessed using uncertainty analysis where we systematically analyse how Index rankings vary across simulations with randomly perturbed weighting schemes. In addition, we explore the reliability of experts’ assessment of policy implementation, reporting on a common vignette undertaken by all country-expert evaluators.
Results
The analysis of conceptual validity is a reproduction of the logic supporting the contention that the project’s underpinning normative document (a report produced by the UN system coordination Task Team on the Implementation of the UN System Common Position on drug-related matters) represents a solid starting point of what will be a sustained, iterative research process to develop a valid conceptual and operational basis for comparative evaluation of national drug policies. The empirical analysis of construct validity reveals that operationalising the Common Position creates a set of variables with a coherent multidimensional structure that is amenable to aggregation into an overall index. While the performance of states under simulations of different weighting schemes was highly consistent, country expert evaluation in developing state codes on policy implementation can be inconsistent, even when they are provided with a common description designed to capture variance on their rating scale. Cronbach’s alpha indicates that the variables encompassed by the GDPI measure a coherent construct, while EFA results provide support for three of the a priori dimensions used in the creation of the Index.
Conclusions
We conclude that the GDPI project demonstrates that robust comparative evaluation of drug policy at a global scale is possible. However, we also reveal that this project will necessarily be subject to continuous refinement – especially when it comes to standardising expert country evaluations. We outline practical challenges and suggestions for future work in this direction.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Drug Policy provides a forum for the dissemination of current research, reviews, debate, and critical analysis on drug use and drug policy in a global context. It seeks to publish material on the social, political, legal, and health contexts of psychoactive substance use, both licit and illicit. The journal is particularly concerned to explore the effects of drug policy and practice on drug-using behaviour and its health and social consequences. It is the policy of the journal to represent a wide range of material on drug-related matters from around the world.