Nykiforuk Candace I J, Wild T Cameron, Raine Kim D
Centre for Health Promotion Studies, School of Public Health, 3-300 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, University of Alberta, 11405-87 Avenue, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1C9, Canada,
Cancer Causes Control. 2014 Dec;25(12):1683-96. doi: 10.1007/s10552-014-0474-3. Epub 2014 Oct 16.
The knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of key policy influencers and the general public can support or hinder the development of public policies that support cancer prevention. To address gaps in knowledge concerning healthy public policy development, views on cancer causation and endorsement of policy alternatives for cancer prevention among government influencers (elected members of legislative assemblies and senior ministry bureaucrats), non-governmental influencers (school board chairs and superintendents, print media editors and reporters, and workplace presidents and senior human resource managers), and the general public were compared.
Two structured surveys, one administered to a convenience sample of policy influencers (government and non-governmental) and the other to a randomly selected sample of the general public, were used. The aim of these surveys was to understand knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding health promotion principles and the priority and acceptability of policy actions to prevent four behavioral risk factors for cancer (tobacco use, alcohol misuse, unhealthy eating, and physical inactivity). Surveys were administered in Alberta and Manitoba, two comparable Canadian provinces.
Although all groups demonstrated higher levels of support for individualistic policies (e.g., health education campaigns) than for fiscal and legislative measures, the general public expressed consistently greater support than policy influencers for using evidence-based policies (e.g., tax incentives or subsidies for healthy behaviors).
These results suggest that Canadian policy influencers may be less open that the general public to adopt healthy public policies for cancer prevention, with potential detriment to cancer rates.
关键政策影响者和公众的知识、态度和信念可能支持或阻碍有助于癌症预防的公共政策的制定。为了填补健康公共政策制定方面的知识空白，对政府影响者（立法议会当选成员和高级部委官僚）、非政府影响者（学校董事会主席和督学、平面媒体编辑和记者以及职场总裁和高级人力资源经理）以及公众在癌症成因方面的观点和对癌症预防政策替代方案的认可情况进行了比较。
使用了两项结构化调查，一项针对政策影响者（政府和非政府）的便利样本进行，另一项针对随机抽取的公众样本进行。这些调查的目的是了解关于健康促进原则以及预防癌症的四种行为风险因素（烟草使用、酒精滥用、不健康饮食和身体活动不足）的政策行动的优先级和可接受性的知识、态度和信念。调查在加拿大两个类似的省份艾伯塔省和曼尼托巴省进行。
尽管所有群体对个人主义政策（如健康教育活动）的支持程度都高于财政和立法措施，但公众对采用基于证据的政策（如对健康行为的税收激励或补贴）的支持始终高于政策影响者。
这些结果表明，加拿大政策影响者在采纳有助于癌症预防的健康公共政策方面可能不如公众开放，这可能对癌症发病率产生不利影响。
