制定预测和评估公共卫生干预措施的不良后果和其他意外后果的总体框架(CONSEQUENT):最佳框架综述

Jan M Stratil, R. Biallas, A. Movsisyan, Kathryn Oliver, Eva Rehfuess
{"title":"制定预测和评估公共卫生干预措施的不良后果和其他意外后果的总体框架(CONSEQUENT):最佳框架综述","authors":"Jan M Stratil, R. Biallas, A. Movsisyan, Kathryn Oliver, Eva Rehfuess","doi":"10.1136/bmjph-2023-000209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the best intentions and intended beneficial outcomes, public health (PH) interventions can have adverse effects and other unintended consequences (AUCs). AUCs are rarely systematically examined when developing, evaluating or implementing PH interventions. We, therefore, used a multipronged, evidence-based approach to develop a framework to support researchers and decision-makers in anticipating and assessing AUCs of PH interventions.We employed the ‘best-fit’ synthesis approach, starting with an a priori framework and iteratively revising this based on systematically identified evidence. The a priori framework was designed using key elements of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel, to root it in global health norms and values, established mechanisms of PH interventions and a complexity perspective. The a priori framework was advanced based on theoretical and conceptual publications and systematic reviews on the topic of AUCs in PH. Thematic analysis was used to revise the framework and identify new themes. To test the framework, it was coded against four systematic reviews of AUCs of PH interventions.The Cosequences of Public Health Interventions (CONSEQUENT) framework includes two components: the first focuses on AUCs and serves to categorise them; the second (supplementary) component highlights the mechanisms through which AUCs may arise. The first component comprises eight domains of consequences: health, health system, human rights, acceptability and adherence, equality, and equity, social and institutional, economic and resources, and the environment.The CONSEQUENT framework is intended to facilitate classification and conceptualisation of AUCs of PH interventions during their development or evaluation to support evidence-informed decision-making.","PeriodicalId":117861,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of an overarching framework for anticipating and assessing adverse and other unintended consequences of public health interventions (CONSEQUENT): a best-fit framework synthesis\",\"authors\":\"Jan M Stratil, R. Biallas, A. Movsisyan, Kathryn Oliver, Eva Rehfuess\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjph-2023-000209\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite the best intentions and intended beneficial outcomes, public health (PH) interventions can have adverse effects and other unintended consequences (AUCs). AUCs are rarely systematically examined when developing, evaluating or implementing PH interventions. We, therefore, used a multipronged, evidence-based approach to develop a framework to support researchers and decision-makers in anticipating and assessing AUCs of PH interventions.We employed the ‘best-fit’ synthesis approach, starting with an a priori framework and iteratively revising this based on systematically identified evidence. The a priori framework was designed using key elements of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel, to root it in global health norms and values, established mechanisms of PH interventions and a complexity perspective. The a priori framework was advanced based on theoretical and conceptual publications and systematic reviews on the topic of AUCs in PH. Thematic analysis was used to revise the framework and identify new themes. To test the framework, it was coded against four systematic reviews of AUCs of PH interventions.The Cosequences of Public Health Interventions (CONSEQUENT) framework includes two components: the first focuses on AUCs and serves to categorise them; the second (supplementary) component highlights the mechanisms through which AUCs may arise. The first component comprises eight domains of consequences: health, health system, human rights, acceptability and adherence, equality, and equity, social and institutional, economic and resources, and the environment.The CONSEQUENT framework is intended to facilitate classification and conceptualisation of AUCs of PH interventions during their development or evaluation to support evidence-informed decision-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":117861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Public Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2023-000209\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2023-000209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管公共卫生(PH)干预措施的初衷是好的,预期结果也是有益的,但它可能会产生不良影响和其他意外后果(AUCs)。在制定、评估或实施公共卫生干预措施时,很少对 AUC 进行系统的研究。因此,我们采用多管齐下、以证据为基础的方法制定了一个框架,以支持研究人员和决策者预测和评估公共卫生干预措施的AUC。我们采用了 "最合适 "的综合方法,从先验框架开始,根据系统识别的证据对其进行反复修订。先验框架的设计采用了世界卫生组织综合框架(WHO-INTEGRATE)和 "行为改变轮"(Behaviour Change Wheel)的关键要素,使其植根于全球卫生规范和价值观、公共卫生干预的既定机制以及复杂性视角。先验框架是在有关卫生保健中的 AUCs 主题的理论和概念出版物及系统综述的基础上提出的。采用主题分析法对框架进行了修订,并确定了新的主题。公共卫生干预的后果(CONSEQUENT)框架包括两部分:第一部分重点关注公共卫生干预的后果,并对其进行分类;第二部分(补充)强调公共卫生干预的后果可能产生的机制。第一部分包括八个后果领域:健康、卫生系统、人权、可接受性和坚持性、平等和公平、社会和制度、经济和资源以及环境。CONSEQUENT 框架旨在促进在制定或评估公共卫生干预措施时对其 AUCs 进行分类和概念化,以支持循证决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of an overarching framework for anticipating and assessing adverse and other unintended consequences of public health interventions (CONSEQUENT): a best-fit framework synthesis
Despite the best intentions and intended beneficial outcomes, public health (PH) interventions can have adverse effects and other unintended consequences (AUCs). AUCs are rarely systematically examined when developing, evaluating or implementing PH interventions. We, therefore, used a multipronged, evidence-based approach to develop a framework to support researchers and decision-makers in anticipating and assessing AUCs of PH interventions.We employed the ‘best-fit’ synthesis approach, starting with an a priori framework and iteratively revising this based on systematically identified evidence. The a priori framework was designed using key elements of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel, to root it in global health norms and values, established mechanisms of PH interventions and a complexity perspective. The a priori framework was advanced based on theoretical and conceptual publications and systematic reviews on the topic of AUCs in PH. Thematic analysis was used to revise the framework and identify new themes. To test the framework, it was coded against four systematic reviews of AUCs of PH interventions.The Cosequences of Public Health Interventions (CONSEQUENT) framework includes two components: the first focuses on AUCs and serves to categorise them; the second (supplementary) component highlights the mechanisms through which AUCs may arise. The first component comprises eight domains of consequences: health, health system, human rights, acceptability and adherence, equality, and equity, social and institutional, economic and resources, and the environment.The CONSEQUENT framework is intended to facilitate classification and conceptualisation of AUCs of PH interventions during their development or evaluation to support evidence-informed decision-making.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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