Engaging community sport and recreation organisations in population health interventions: Factors affecting the formation, implementation, and institutionalisation of partnerships efforts

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meghan M. Casey ◽  
Warren R. Payne ◽  
Sue J. Brown ◽  
Rochelle M. Eime
Author(s):  
G Moore ◽  
L Copeland ◽  
A Movsisyan ◽  
M Campbell ◽  
P Craig ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e038965
Author(s):  
Mhairi Campbell ◽  
Graham Moore ◽  
Rhiannon E Evans ◽  
Dmitry Khodyakov ◽  
Peter Craig

IntroductionComplex population health interventions that are effective in one context may not be effective elsewhere, and may even be harmful. As such, an intervention may require adaptation to ensure it fits with a new context. To date, there is no overarching guidance to help researchers to adapt and evaluate interventions in new contexts, and no criteria to support research funders or journals assess proposed or reported adaptations or evaluation. There is limited assistance for policy-makers and practitioners to decide if evidence-informed interventions are appropriate to their context, or if adaptation and further evaluation is needed. This Delphi exercise will contribute to the development of guidance for these communities to support the adaptation, implementation and/or re-evaluation of complex population health interventions in new contexts.MethodsWe will conduct a Delphi consensus exercise to gather expert opinion from researchers, research funders, journal editors and policy-makers. Expert opinion will be sought on: appropriate definitions and concepts, identifying key methodological considerations and establishing adaptations and processes to be undertaken during adaptation of complex population health interventions in new contexts.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval for the Delphi exercise has been obtained from the University of Glasgow and and the RAND institutional research board. Dissemination of the results of this study will be through peer-reviewed publications, workshops at national and international conferences, and a summary of the guidance developed for key organisations and stakeholders.


2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-190
Author(s):  
Jessica G. Burke ◽  
Jessica R. Thompson ◽  
Patricia L. Mabry ◽  
Christina F. Mair

Systems science can help public health professionals to better understand the complex dynamics between factors affecting health behaviors and outcomes and to identify intervention opportunities. Despite their demonstrated utility in addressing health topics such influenza, tobacco control, and obesity, the associated methods continue to be underutilized by researchers and practitioners addressing health behaviors. This article discusses the growth of systems science methods (e.g., system dynamics, social network analysis, and agent-based modeling) in health research, provides a frame for the articles included in this themed issue, and closes with recommendations for enhancing the future of systems science and health behavior research. We argue that integrating systems sciences methods into health behavior research and practice is essential for improved population health and look forward to supporting the evolution of the field.


2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Ogilvie ◽  
Jean Adams ◽  
Adrian Bauman ◽  
Edward W. Gregg ◽  
Jenna Panter ◽  
...  

Despite smaller effect sizes, interventions delivered at population level to prevent non-communicable diseases generally have greater reach, impact and equity than those delivered to high-risk groups. Nevertheless, how to shift population behaviour patterns in this way remains one of the greatest uncertainties for research and policy. Evidence about behaviour change interventions that are easier to evaluate tends to overshadow that for population-wide and system-wide approaches that generate and sustain healthier behaviours. Population health interventions are often implemented as natural experiments, which makes their evaluation more complex and unpredictable than a typical randomised controlled trial (RCT). We discuss the growing importance of evaluating natural experiments and their distinctive contribution to the evidence for public health policy. We contrast the established evidence-based practice pathway, in which RCTs generate ‘definitive’ evidence for particular interventions, with a practice-based evidence pathway in which evaluation can help adjust the compass bearing of existing policy. We propose that intervention studies should focus on reducing critical uncertainties, that non-randomised study designs should be embraced rather than tolerated and that a more nuanced approach to appraising the utility of diverse types of evidence is required. The complex evidence needed to guide public health action is not necessarily the same as that which is needed to provide an unbiased effect size estimate. The practice-based evidence pathway is neither inferior nor merely the best available when all else fails. It is often the only way to generate meaningful evidence to address critical questions about investing in population health interventions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document