GroundsWell: Community-engaged and data-informed systems transformation of Urban Green and Blue Space for population health - a new initiative.

Natural environments, such as parks, woodlands and lakes, have positive impacts on health and wellbeing. Urban Green and Blue Spaces (UGBS), and the activities that take place in them, can significantly influence the health outcomes of all communities, and reduce health inequalities. Improving access and quality of UGBS needs understanding of the range of systems (e.g. planning, transport, environment, community) in which UGBS are located. UGBS offers an ideal exemplar for testing systems innovations as it reflects place-based and whole society processes , with potential to reduce non-communicable disease (NCD) risk and associated social inequalities in health. UGBS can impact multiple behavioural and environmental aetiological pathways. However, the systems which desire, design, develop, and deliver UGBS are fragmented and siloed, with ineffective mechanisms for data generation, knowledge exchange and mobilisation. Further, UGBS need to be co-designed with and by those whose health could benefit most from them, so they are appropriate, accessible, valued and used well. This paper describes a major new prevention research programme and partnership, GroundsWell, which aims to transform UGBS-related systems by improving how we plan, design, evaluate and manage UGBS so that it benefits all communities, especially those who are in poorest health. We use a broad definition of health to include physical, mental, social wellbeing and quality of life. Our objectives are to transform systems so that UGBS are planned, developed, implemented, maintained and evaluated with our communities and data systems to enhance health and reduce inequalities. GroundsWell will use interdisciplinary, problem-solving approaches to accelerate and optimise community collaborations among citizens, users, implementers, policymakers and researchers to impact research, policy, practice and active citizenship. GroundsWell will be shaped and developed in three pioneer cities (Belfast, Edinburgh, Liverpool) and their regional contexts, with embedded translational mechanisms to ensure that outputs and impact have UK-wide and international application.

Cancer risk in socially marginalised women: An exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a leading cause of premature death in women worldwide, and is associated with socio-economic disadvantage. Yet many interventions designed to reduce risk and improve health fail to reach the most marginalised with the greatest needs. Our study focused on socially marginalised women at two women's centres that provide support and training to women in the judicial system or who have experienced domestic abuse. METHODS: This qualitative study was framed within a sociological rather than behavioural perspective involving thirty participants in individual interviews and focus groups. It sought to understand perceptions of, and vulnerability to, cancer; decision making (including screening); cancer symptom awareness; and views on health promoting activities within the context of the women's social circumstances. FINDINGS: Women's experiences of social adversity profoundly shaped their practices, aspirations and attitudes towards risk, health and healthcare. We found that behaviours such as unhealthy eating and smoking need to be understood in the context of inherently risky lives. They were a coping mechanism whilst living in extreme adverse circumstances, navigating complex everyday lives and structural failings. Long term experiences of neglect, harm and violence, often by people they should be able to trust, led to low self-esteem and influenced their perceptions of risk and self-care. This was reinforced by negative experiences of navigating state services and a lack of control and agency over their own lives. CONCLUSION: Women in this study were at high risk of cancer, but it would be better to understand these risk factors as markers of distress and duress. Without appreciating the wider determinants of health and systemic disadvantage of marginalised groups, and addressing these with a structural rather than an individual response, we risk increasing cancer inequities by failing those who are in the greatest need.

The Development of Public Policies to Address Non-communicable Diseases in the Caribbean Country of Barbados: The Importance of Problem Framing and Policy Entrepreneurs.

BACKGROUND: Government policy measures have a key role to play in the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). The Caribbean, a middle-income region, has the highest per capita burden of NCDs in the Americas. Our aim was to examine policy development and implementation between the years 2000 and 2013 on NCD prevention and control in Barbados, and to investigate factors promoting, and hindering, success. METHODS: A qualitative case study design was used involving a structured policy document review and semi-structured interviews with key informants, identified through stakeholder analysis and 'cascading.' Documents were abstracted into a standard form. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and underwent framework analysis, guided by the multiple streams framework (MSF). There were 25 key informants, from the Ministry of Health (MoH), other government Ministries, civil society organisations, and the private sector. RESULTS: A significant policy window opened between 2005 and 2007 in which new posts to address NCDs were created in the MoH, and a government supported multi-sectoral national NCD commission was established. Factors contributing to this government commitment and funding included a high level of awareness, throughout society, of the NCD burden, including media coverage of local research findings; the availability of policy recommendations by international bodies that could be adopted locally, notably the framework convention on tobacco control (FCTC); and the activities of local highly respected policy entrepreneurs with access to senior politicians, who were able to bring together political concern for the problem with potential policy solutions. However, factors were also identified that hindered multi-sectoral policy development in several areas, including around nutrition, physical activity, and alcohol. These included a lack of consensus (valence) on the nature of the problem, often framed as being predominantly one of individuals needing to take responsibility for their health rather than requiring government-led environmental changes; lack of appropriate detailed policy guidance for local adaptation; conflicts with other political priorities, such as production and export of alcohol, and political reluctance to use legislative and fiscal measures. CONCLUSION: The study's findings indicate mechanisms to promote and support NCD policy development in the Caribbean and similar settings.

Negotiating multisectoral evidence: a qualitative study of knowledge exchange at the intersection of transport and public health.

BACKGROUND: For the prevention and control of chronic diseases, two strategies are frequently highlighted: that public health should be evidence based, and that it should develop a multisectoral approach. At the end of a natural experimental study of the health impacts of new transport infrastructure, we took the opportunity of a knowledge exchange forum to explore how stakeholders assessed, negotiated and intended to apply multisectoral evidence in policy and practice at the intersection of transport and health. We aimed to better understand the challenges they faced in knowledge exchange, as well as their everyday experiences with working in multisectoral remits. METHODS: In 2015, we conducted participant observation during an interactive event with 41 stakeholders from national and local government, the third sector and academia in Cambridge, UK. Formal and informal interactions between stakeholders were recorded in observational field notes. We also conducted 18 semistructured interviews reflecting on the event and on knowledge exchange in general. RESULTS: We found that stakeholders negotiated a variety of challenges. First, stakeholders had to negotiate relatively new formal and informal multisectoral remits; and how to reconcile the differing expectations of transport specialists, who tended to emphasise the importance of precedence in guiding action, and health specialists' concern for the rigour and synthesis of research evidence. Second, research in this field involved complex study designs, and often produced evidence with uncertain transferability to other settings. Third, health outcomes of transport schemes had political traction and were used strategically but not easily translated into cost-benefit ratios. Finally, knowledge exchange meant multiple directions of influence. Stakeholders were concerned that researchers did not always have skills to translate their findings into understandable evidence, and some stakeholders would welcome opportunities to influence research agendas. CONCLUSIONS: This case study of stakeholders' experiences indicates that multisectoral research, practice and policymaking requires the ability and capacity to locate, understand and communicate complex evidence from a variety of disciplines, and integrate different types of evidence into clear business cases beyond sectoral boundaries.

Walking groups in socioeconomically deprived communities: A qualitative study using photo elicitation.

Walking groups can benefit health but uptake is more likely amongst those who are socially well-situated and need them least. This study worked with a new walking group in a community in England with poor health and socio-economic indicators to understand non-participation and barriers to involvement. It used a qualitative approach. Participant generated photographs captured the physical and social environments in which they walked and these were used with semi-structured interviews to inductively explore walking group participation and the wider social context of walking. We found that prior to joining there were low expectations of any health benefit and walking groups were not viewed as 'proper' activity. The group format and social expectations presented a barrier to joining. Having joined participants described a developing awareness of the health benefits of walking. The shared sense of achieving health goals with others sustained the group rather than socialising, per se. We suggest that walking group participation is a complex social practice. Promoting walking groups as a social activity for this group of people may well have been counter-productive.

Non-urgent accident and emergency department use as a socially shared custom: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: We explored attitudes of non-urgent accident and emergency department (AED) patients in the middle-income healthcare setting Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) in the Caribbean to understand how and why they decide to seek emergency care and resist using primary care facilities. METHODS: In 2013, we conducted 12 semistructured interviews with a purposive sample of non-urgent AED users from a variety of social backgrounds. Verbatim transcripts were analysed with a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: In this study, we found, first, that participants automatically chose to visit the AED and described this as a locally shared custom. Second, the healthcare system in SVG reinforced this habitual use of the AED, for example, by health professionals routinely referring non-urgent cases to the AED. Third, there was also some deliberate use; patients took convenience and the systemic encouragement into account to determine that the AED was the most appropriate choice for healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the attitudes and habits of the Vincentian non-urgent patient are major determinants of their AED use and are intricately linked to local, socially shared practices of AED use. Findings show that health services research should reconsider rational choice behaviour models and further explore customs of health-seeking.

Policy initiatives, culture and the prevention and control of chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in the Caribbean.

OBJECTIVE: To explore interactions between disease burden, culture and the policy response to non-communicable diseases (NCDs) within the Caribbean, a region with some of the highest prevalence rates, morbidity and mortality from NCDs in the Americas. METHODS: We undertook a wide ranging narrative review, drawing on a variety of peer reviewed, government and intergovernmental literature. RESULTS: Although the Caribbean is highly diverse, linguistically and ethnically, it is possible to show how 'culture' at the macro-level has been shaped by shared historic, economic and political experiences and ties. We suggest four broad groupings of countries: the English-speaking Caribbean Community (CARICOM); the small island states that are still colonies or departments of colonial powers; three large-Spanish speaking countries; and Haiti, which although part of CARICOM is culturally distinct. We explore how NCD health policies in the region stem from and are influenced by the broad characteristics of these groupings, albeit played out in varied ways in individual countries. For example, the Port of Spain declaration (2007) on NCDs can be understood as the product of the co-operative and collaborative relationships with CARICOM, which are based on a shared broad culture. We note, however, that studies investigating the relationships between the formation of NCD policy and culture (at any level) are scarce. CONCLUSION: Within the Caribbean region it is possible to discern relationships between culture at the macro-level and the formation of NCD policy. However, there is little work that directly assesses the interactions between culture and NCD policy formation. The Caribbean with its cultural diversity and high burden of NCDs provides an ideal environment within which to undertake further studies to better understand the interactions between culture and health policy formation.

Healthy travel and the socio-economic structure of car commuting in Cambridge, UK: a mixed-methods analysis.

Car use is associated with substantial health and environmental costs but research in deprived populations indicates that car access may also promote psychosocial well-being within car-oriented environments. This mixed-method (quantitative and qualitative) study examined this issue in a more affluent setting, investigating the socio-economic structure of car commuting in Cambridge, UK. Our analyses involved integrating self-reported questionnaire data from 1142 participants in the Commuting and Health in Cambridge study (collected in 2009) and in-depth interviews with 50 participants (collected 2009-2010). Even in Britain's leading 'cycling city', cars were a key resource in bridging the gap between individuals' desires and their circumstances. This applied both to long-term life goals such as home ownership and to shorter-term challenges such as illness. Yet car commuting was also subject to constraints, with rush hour traffic pushing drivers to start work earlier and with restrictions on, or charges for, workplace parking pushing drivers towards multimodal journeys (e.g. driving to a 'park-and-ride' site then walking). These patterns of car commuting were socio-economically structured in several ways. First, the gradient of housing costs made living near Cambridge more expensive, affecting who could 'afford' to cycle and perhaps making cycling the more salient local marker of Bourdieu's class distinction. Nevertheless, cars were generally affordable in this relatively affluent, highly-educated population, reducing the barrier which distance posed to labour-force participation. Finally, having the option of starting work early required flexible hours, a form of job control which in Britain is more common among higher occupational classes. Following a social model of disability, we conclude that socio-economic advantage can make car-oriented environments less disabling via both greater affluence and greater job control, and in ways manifested across the full socio-economic range. This suggests the importance of combining individual-level 'healthy travel' interventions with measures aimed at creating travel environments in which all social groups can pursue healthy and satisfying lives.

Commuting and health in Cambridge: a study of a 'natural experiment' in the provision of new transport infrastructure.

BACKGROUND: Modifying transport infrastructure to support active travel (walking and cycling) could help to increase population levels of physical activity. However, there is limited evidence for the effects of interventions in this field, and to the best of our knowledge no study has convincingly demonstrated an increase in physical activity directly attributable to this type of intervention. We have therefore taken the opportunity presented by a 'natural experiment' in Cambridgeshire, UK to establish a quasi-experimental study of the effects of a major transport infrastructural intervention on travel behaviour, physical activity and related wider health impacts. DESIGN AND METHODS: The Commuting and Health in Cambridge study comprises three main elements: a cohort study of adults who travel to work in Cambridge, using repeated postal questionnaires and basic objective measurement of physical activity using accelerometers; in-depth quantitative studies of physical activity energy expenditure, travel and movement patterns and estimated carbon emissions using household travel diaries, combined heart rate and movement sensors and global positioning system (GPS) receivers; and a longitudinal qualitative interview study to elucidate participants' attitudes, experiences and practices and to understand how environmental and social factors interact to influence travel behaviour, for whom and in what circumstances. The impacts of a specific intervention - the opening of the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway - and of other changes in the physical environment will be examined using a controlled quasi-experimental design within the overall cohort dataset. DISCUSSION: Addressing the unresolved research and policy questions in this area is not straightforward. The challenges include those of effectively combining different disciplinary perspectives on the research problems, developing common methodological ground in measurement and evaluation, implementing robust quantitative measurement of travel and physical activity behaviour in an unpredictable 'natural experiment' setting, defining exposure to the intervention, defining controls, and conceptualising an appropriate longitudinal analytical strategy.