The Limitations and Potentials of Evaluating Economic Aspects of Community-Based Health Promotion: A Critical Review.

Community-based health promotion (CBHP) interventions are promising approaches to address public health problems; however, their economic evaluation presents unique challenges. This review aims to explore the opportunities and limitations of evaluating economic aspects of CBHP, focusing on the assessment of intervention costs and outcomes, and the consideration of political-level changes and health equity. A systematic search of the PubMed, Web of Science and PsycInfo databases identified 24 CBHP interventions, the majority of which targeted disadvantaged communities. Only five interventions included a detailed cost/resource assessment. Outcomes at the operational level were mainly quantitative, related to sociodemographics and environment or health status, while outcomes at the political level were often qualitative, related to public policy, capacity building or networks/collaboration. The study highlights the limitations of traditional health economic evaluation methods in capturing the complexity of CBHP interventions. It proposes the use of cost-consequence analysis (CCA) as a more comprehensive approach, offering a flexible and multifaceted assessment of costs and outcomes. However, challenges remain in the measurement and valuation of outcomes, equity considerations, intersectoral costs and attribution of effects. While CCA is a promising starting point, further research and methodological advancements are needed to refine its application and improve decision making in CBHP.

Multi-level stakeholders' perspectives on implementation and scaling up community-based health promotion in Germany.

Community-based health promotion has the potential to address existing health inequities, although such approaches are scarcely scaled up. For a successful scale up, various stakeholders at different levels and sectors need to be involved. The article's aims are to assess what kind of external support communities need for implementation and to identify facilitators and barriers for scaling up community-based health promotion. Two national digital workshops were conducted in Germany with stakeholders at the community level (n = 161) and with stakeholders at the federal and state levels (n = 84). Protocols were compiled and coded using qualitative content analysis. During the first workshop, we revealed 11 themes for external support needs ('Strategic approach', 'Define & compare indicators', 'International human resource', 'Tools & Aids', 'External conduction of the assessment', 'Involvement of people in difficult life situations', 'Overview of actors', 'Moderation', 'Obtain funding', 'Quality assurance/evaluation' and 'External support'). Eleven facilitators and barriers were identified for scaling up ('Assessment and evaluation', 'Intersectoral collaboration and partnerships', 'Communication', 'Characteristics of the program', 'Political and legal conditions', 'Political support', 'Local coordinator', 'Resources', 'Participation', 'Strategic planning/methods' and 'Intermediary organization'). The identified results provide practice-based evidence on support needed for scaling up, facilitators that promote scaling up and barriers that might hinder scaling up community-based health promotion in Germany. In a next step, this practice-based evidence needs to be systematically integrated with scientific-based evidence on key components for scaling up such approaches for the development of an effective scaling-up concept.

The major aim of this article is to describe how German stakeholders at different levels (local, federal and state) from various sectors (e.g. health, social or sports) were involved to develop a scaling-up concept for a community-based health promotion approach with a focus on health equity in the field of physical activity promotion. Different actors from science, policy and practice discussed facilitators and barriers for the scale up and what external support communities need to implement a community-based health promotion approach, with a focus on people in difficult life situations (e.g. individuals with social disadvantages). We identified 14 different kind of support needs and 11 facilitators and barriers for scaling up community-based health promotion approaches in the field of physical activity promotion. Various actors emphasized the need for improved collaboration and partnerships across several sectors as well as changes in current political and legal conditions. Furthermore, the role and some characteristics of an external organization to support a successful scaling-up process were also discussed among actors.

Population-based physical activity promotion with a focus on health equity: a review of reviews.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which people are physically active is dependent upon social gradients. Numerous studies have shown that especially people with social disadvantages do not meet the physical activity (PA) recommendations. A promising strategy to alleviate this issue are approaches that promote PA in the general population. In addition, several researchers have raised concerns that population-based health interventions may increase health inequities. The aim of the current review of reviews was therefore to identify successful population-based PA promotion approaches with a particular focus on health equity. METHODS: Six electronic databases were examined for systematic reviews on population-based PA promotion for the period 2015 to 2021. A reference list and grey literature search were also conducted. Two independent reviewers used inclusion/exclusion criteria to screen titles and abstracts of the potentially relevant literature and conducted a quality assessment for each identified review. All included reviews of population-based approaches for PA promotion with a focus on disadvantaged populations and/or health equity were narratively summarized. RESULTS: Our search resulted in 4,411 hits. After a systematic review process, six reviews met the inclusion criteria and were included after they were all rated as high quality. We identified that mass-media campaigns, point-of-decision prompts, environmental approaches, policy approaches, and community-based multi-component approaches can promote PA in the general population. Across populations with social disadvantages mass-media campaigns, point-of-decision prompts and policy approaches are likely to be effective as long as they are tailored. Regarding environmental approaches, the results are inconsistent. None of the reviews on community-based multi-component approaches provided evidence on health equity. CONCLUSION: There are several effective approaches to promote PA in the general population but evidence regarding health equity is still sparse. Future studies should therefore pay more attention to this missing focus. Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence regarding the type of tailoring and the long-term impact of population-based approaches to PA promotion. However, this requires appropriate funding programmes, complex study designs and evaluation methods.

Development of a Framework for Scaling Up Community-Based Health Promotion: A Best Fit Framework Synthesis.

Community-based health promotion with a focus on people with social disadvantages is essential to address persistently existing health inequities. However, achieving an impact on public health requires scaling up such approaches beyond manifold funded pilot projects. The aim of this qualitative review is to provide an overview of scaling-up frameworks in health promotion and to identify key components for scaling up community-based health promotion. First, we conducted a systematic search for scaling-up frameworks for health promotion in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and SportDiscus. Based on the included frameworks, we created an a priori framework. Second, we searched for primary research studies in the same databases that reported scaling-up processes of community-based health promotion. We coded the data using the a priori framework. From 80 articles, a total of 12 frameworks were eligible, and 5 were included for data extraction. The analysis yielded 10 a priori defined key components: "innovation characteristics"; "clarify and coordinate roles and responsibilities"; "build up skills, knowledge, and capacity"; "mobilize and sustain resources"; "initiate and maintain regular communication"; "plan, conduct, and apply assessment, monitoring, and evaluation"; "develop political commitment and advocacy"; "build and foster collaboration"; "encourage participation and ownership"; and "plan and follow strategic approaches". We further identified 113 primary research studies; 10 were eligible. No new key components were found, but all a priori defined key components were supported by the studies. Ten key components for scaling up community-based health promotion represent the final framework. We further identified "encourage participation and ownership" as a crucial component regarding health equity.

Co-producing an action-oriented framework for community-based Physical Activity Promotion in Germany.

German National Recommendations for Physical Activity (PA) and PA Promotion recommend community-based approaches to promote PA at the local level with a focus on health equity. In addition, the German Federal Prevention Act addresses health equity and strengthens setting-based health promotion in communities. However, the implementation of both in the local context remains a challenge. This article describes Phase 1 of the KOMBINE project that aims to co-produce an action-oriented framework for community-based PA promotion focusing on structural change and health equity. (i) In a series of workshops, key stakeholders and researchers discussed facilitators, barriers and needs of community-based PA promotion focusing on health equity. (ii) The research team used an inductive approach to cluster all findings and to identify key components and then (iii) compared the key components with updated literature. (iv) Key components were discussed and incorporated into a gradually co-produced framework by the participants. The first result of the co-production process was a catalog of nine key components regarding PA-related health promotion in German communities. The comparison of key components with scientific evidence showed a high overlap. Finally, a six-phase action-oriented framework including key components for community-based PA promotion was co-produced. The six-phase action-oriented framework integrates practice-based and scientific evidence on PA-related health promotion and health equity. It represents a shared vision for the implementation of National Recommendations for PA and PA Promotion in Germany. The extent to which structural changes and health equity can be achieved is currently being investigated in pilot-studies.

This paper describes how the participants in the KOMBINE project were involved in an innovative approach to transfer the German National Recommendations for Physical Activity (PA) and PA Promotion into the local practice of communities. Scientists, politicians and community actors (e.g. mayors, heads of sports departments) discussed their knowledge and experiences of facilitators, barriers and needs to promote PA in communities, specifically for people in difficult life situations (e.g. individuals with social disadvantages). Based on the results, they jointly developed key components and an action-oriented framework to implement the National Recommendations for PA and PA Promotion in German communities.