社区参与叙事:公共卫生干预措施的系统评价衍生概念框架

Narratives of community engagement: a systematic review-derived conceptual framework for public health interventions.

机构信息

Department of Social Science, Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating (EPPI)-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London UK, 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NR, UK.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Manchester, UK.

出版信息

BMC Public Health. 2017 Dec 11;17(1):944. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4958-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Government policy increasingly supports engaging communities to promote health. It is critical to consider whether such strategies are effective, for whom, and under what circumstances. However, 'community engagement' is defined in diverse ways and employed for different reasons. Considering the theory and context we developed a conceptual framework which informs understanding about what makes an effective (or ineffective) community engagement intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of community engagement in public health interventions using: stakeholder involvement; searching, screening, appraisal and coding of research literature; and iterative thematic syntheses and meta-analysis. A conceptual framework of community engagement was refined, following interactions between the framework and each review stage.

RESULTS

From 335 included reports, three products emerged: (1) two strong theoretical 'meta-narratives': one, concerning the theory and practice of empowerment/engagement as an independent objective; and a more utilitarian perspective optimally configuring health services to achieve defined outcomes. These informed (2) models that were operationalized in subsequent meta-analysis. Both refined (3) the final conceptual framework. This identified multiple dimensions by which community engagement interventions may differ. Diverse combinations of intervention purpose, theory and implementation were noted, including: ways of defining communities and health needs; initial motivations for community engagement; types of participation; conditions and actions necessary for engagement; and potential issues influencing impact. Some dimensions consistently co-occurred, leading to three overarching models of effective engagement which either: utilised peer-led delivery; employed varying degrees of collaboration between communities and health services; or built on empowerment philosophies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our conceptual framework and models are useful tools for considering appropriate and effective approaches to community engagement. These should be tested and adapted to facilitate intervention design and evaluation. Using this framework may disentangle the relative effectiveness of different models of community engagement, promoting effective, sustainable and appropriate initiatives.

摘要

背景

政府政策越来越多地支持社区参与以促进健康。关键是要考虑这些策略是否有效、对谁有效以及在什么情况下有效。然而,“社区参与”的定义多种多样,其应用目的也各不相同。考虑到我们发展的理论和背景,我们制定了一个概念框架,该框架为理解是什么使社区参与干预措施有效(或无效)提供了信息。

方法

我们使用利益相关者参与、研究文献的搜索、筛选、评估和编码,以及迭代主题综合和荟萃分析,对公共卫生干预措施中的社区参与进行了系统评价。在框架与每个审查阶段之间的相互作用之后,对社区参与框架进行了细化。

结果

从 335 份纳入的报告中,出现了三个产品:(1)两个强大的理论“元叙事”:一个涉及赋权/参与作为独立目标的理论和实践;另一个更实用的观点是最佳配置卫生服务以实现既定结果。这为随后的荟萃分析提供了(2)模型。两者都(3)细化了最终的概念框架。这确定了社区参与干预措施可能存在差异的多个维度。注意到干预目的、理论和实施的不同组合,包括:定义社区和健康需求的方式;社区参与的最初动机;参与的类型;参与的必要条件和行动;以及可能影响影响的潜在问题。一些维度经常同时出现,导致三种有效的参与模型,这些模型要么:利用同伴主导的交付方式;在社区和卫生服务之间采用不同程度的合作;或者基于赋权理念。

结论

我们的概念框架和模型是考虑社区参与适当和有效方法的有用工具。这些应该经过测试和调整,以促进干预设计和评估。使用这个框架可以理清不同社区参与模式的相对有效性,促进有效、可持续和适当的举措。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7c5a/5725895/0f498950a6c0/12889_2017_4958_Fig1_HTML.jpg

引用本文的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索