Methods for evaluating intersectoral action partnerships to address the social determinants of health: a scoping review.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Roshaany Asirvatham, Allison Nelson, Jonathan Northam, Kelsey Lucyk
{"title":"Methods for evaluating intersectoral action partnerships to address the social determinants of health: a scoping review.","authors":"Roshaany Asirvatham, Allison Nelson, Jonathan Northam, Kelsey Lucyk","doi":"10.24095/hpcdp.44.9.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Many of the social and economic factors that shape conditions for population health and health equity (e.g. income, education and employment) lie outside of the health sector. Intersectoral action (ISA) is pivotal to building diverse partnerships that address these social determinants of health. Despite the significant role of ISA, there are few comprehensive reports from the health sector on how such partnerships are evaluated. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of examples of ISA partnership evaluations, including the identification of evaluation methods, tools and indicators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search of two academic databases, Embase and MEDLINE, identified seven relevant studies published between 2012 and 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Common evaluation approaches were network analysis, community- or system- level analysis, partnership evaluation and longitudinal process evaluation. Five of the studies assessed the strength and functionality of partnerships, with reach (e.g. distance between partners) used most frequently as an indicator.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite the complexity of evaluating ISA partnerships, such evaluations are crucial for assessing impacts on health outcomes and social determinants of health, goal achievement, accountability and sustainability. Different evaluation models are available to program planners and evaluators involved in ISA initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":51316,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada-Research Policy and Practice","volume":"44 10","pages":"440-449"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11542738/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada-Research Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24095/hpcdp.44.9.04","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Many of the social and economic factors that shape conditions for population health and health equity (e.g. income, education and employment) lie outside of the health sector. Intersectoral action (ISA) is pivotal to building diverse partnerships that address these social determinants of health. Despite the significant role of ISA, there are few comprehensive reports from the health sector on how such partnerships are evaluated. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of examples of ISA partnership evaluations, including the identification of evaluation methods, tools and indicators.

Methods: A literature search of two academic databases, Embase and MEDLINE, identified seven relevant studies published between 2012 and 2022.

Results: Common evaluation approaches were network analysis, community- or system- level analysis, partnership evaluation and longitudinal process evaluation. Five of the studies assessed the strength and functionality of partnerships, with reach (e.g. distance between partners) used most frequently as an indicator.

Conclusion: Despite the complexity of evaluating ISA partnerships, such evaluations are crucial for assessing impacts on health outcomes and social determinants of health, goal achievement, accountability and sustainability. Different evaluation models are available to program planners and evaluators involved in ISA initiatives.

评估跨部门行动伙伴关系以解决健康的社会决定因素的方法:范围审查。
导言:影响人口健康和健康公平条件的许多社会和经济因素(如收入、教育和就业)都在卫生部门之外。跨部门行动(ISA)对于建立多样化的合作伙伴关系以解决这些健康的社会决定因素至关重要。尽管跨部门行动发挥着重要作用,但卫生部门很少有关于如何评估此类伙伴关系的全面报告。本次范围界定审查的目的是概述对 ISA 伙伴关系进行评估的实例,包括确定评估方法、工具和指标:方法:对 Embase 和 MEDLINE 两个学术数据库进行文献检索,确定了 2012 年至 2022 年间发表的七项相关研究:常见的评估方法有网络分析、社区或系统层面分析、伙伴关系评估和纵向过程评估。其中五项研究评估了合作伙伴关系的强度和功能,最常用的指标是影响力(如合作伙伴之间的距离):尽管对基础设施服务部门合作伙伴关系进行评估非常复杂,但这种评估对于评估对健康结果和健康的社会决定因素、目标实现、问责制和可持续性的影响至关重要。参与基础设施服务协议倡议的计划规划者和评估者可采用不同的评估模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada: Research, Policy and Practice (the HPCDP Journal) is the monthly, online scientific journal of the Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention Branch of the Public Health Agency of Canada. The journal publishes articles on disease prevention, health promotion and health equity in the areas of chronic diseases, injuries and life course health. Content includes research from fields such as public/community health, epidemiology, biostatistics, the behavioural and social sciences, and health services or economics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信