Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
PLoS One ; 19(2): e0278434, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38349894

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Many regions in the world are using the population health approach and require a means to measure the health of their population of interest. Population health frameworks provide a theoretical grounding for conceptualization of population health and therefore a logical basis for selection of indicators. The aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview and summary of the characteristics of existing population health frameworks that have been used to conceptualize the measurement of population health. METHODS: We used the Population, Concept and Context (PCC) framework to define eligibility criteria of frameworks. We were interested in frameworks applicable for general populations, that contained components of measurement of health with or without its antecedents and applied at the population level or used a population health approach. Eligible reports of eligible frameworks should include at least domains and subdomains, purpose, or indicators. We searched 5 databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, NYAM Grey Literature Report, and OpenGrey), governmental and organizational sites on Google and websites of selected organizations using keywords from the PCC framework. Characteristics of the frameworks were summarized descriptively and narratively. RESULTS: Fifty-seven frameworks were included. The majority originated from the US (46%), Europe (23%) and Canada (19%). Apart from 1 framework developed for rural populations and 2 for indigenous populations, the rest were for general urban populations. The numbers of domains, subdomains and indicators were highly variable. Health status and social determinants of health were the most common domains across all frameworks. Different frameworks had different priorities and therefore focus on different domains. CONCLUSION: Key domains common across frameworks other than health status were social determinants of health, health behaviours and healthcare system performance. The results in this review serve as a useful resource for governments and healthcare organizations for informing their population health measurement efforts.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Canada , Europe
2.
Health Promot Int ; 37(6)2022 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36398941

ABSTRACT

The family is an important contributor to the cultural conditions that support health. Current challenges in family health promotion interventions include programme design that is not always guided by theory and change mechanisms. Multifaceted programmes also make it hard to examine what works for whom, given different family roles and the range of lifestyle behaviour and mechanisms examined within diverse conceptual frameworks and cultures. We performed a scoping review on the heterogeneous literature to map and categorize the models and mechanisms by which a family may promote health behaviours among its members. We searched five electronic databases and grey literature up to 2020. Publications were included if they examined health-promoting behaviours, influences at the family level, and outlined the behavioural mechanisms involved. Two hundred and forty studies were identified. Ecological systems theory, social cognitive theory, family systems theory and the theory of planned behaviour were the frameworks most widely used in explaining either study context and/or mechanism. The most frequently studied family mechanisms involved aspects of family support, supervision and modelling, while some studies also included individual-level mechanisms. Majority of the studies investigated parental influence on the child, while few studies assessed the elderly family member as a recipient or actor of the influences. Studies on African, Asian and Middle Eastern populations were also in the minority, highlighting room for further research. Improving the understanding of context and behavioural mechanisms for family health promotion will aid the development of public health policy and chronic disease prevention programmes, complementing efforts targeted at individuals.


Subject(s)
Health Promotion , Life Style , Humans , Child , Aged , Psychological Theory , Family , Population Groups
3.
Front Public Health ; 10: 988525, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36276392

ABSTRACT

Background: The Family Health Climate (FHC) is a family environment attribute postulated to influence the health behaviors of family members. It can be measured by domain scales for physical activity (FHC-PA) and nutrition (FHC-NU), which have been validated and used to identify health climate patterns in families in Western populations. To extend the use of the scales to Asian settings, this study aimed to adapt and validate the instruments for use in the multi-ethnic population of Singapore, accounting for language and cultural differences. Methods: In Part A (n = 40) to adapt the scales for the Singapore population, we performed cognitive interviews, face validity testing and pre-testing of the instruments (n = 40). Besides English, the scales were translated into Chinese and Malay. In Part B (n = 400), we performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses respectively on two random samples. We also tested for item discriminant validity, internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and measurement invariance. Results: The findings from the cognitive interviews in Part A led to scale adaptations to accommodate cultural and linguistic factors. In Part B, EFA on Sample I resulted in a three-factor model for the PA scale (accounting for 71.2% variance) and a four-factor model for the NU scale (accounting for 72.8% variance). CFA on Sample II indicated acceptable model fits: FHC-PA: χ2 = 192.29, df = 101, p < 0.001, χ2/df = 1.90; SRMR = 0.049; RMSEA = 0.067; CFI = 0.969; TLI = 0.963; FHC-NU: χ2 = 170.46, df = 98, p < 0.001, χ2/df = 1.74; SRMR = 0.036; RMSEA = 0.061; CFI = 0.967; TLI = 0.960. The scores of family members demonstrated significant agreement on the FHC-PA (Sg) [ICC(2, 2) = 0.77] and FHC-NU (Sg) [ICC(2, 2) = 0.75] scales. Findings suggest good evidence for item discriminant validity, internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and measurement invariance. Short versions of the scales were also developed. Conclusion: We adapted, translated and validated the scales for assessing the health climate of families in Singapore, including the development of short versions. The results showed good psychometric properties and the constructs had significant relationships with health behaviors and routines. Improving our understanding of family influences on individual health behavior will be important in developing multi-level strategies for health promotion and chronic disease prevention.


Subject(s)
Family Health , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires , Psychometrics , Factor Analysis, Statistical
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...