【2h】

How Do We Evaluate Health in All Policies?

机译:我们如何在所有政策中评估健康状况?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

It is well-established that population health is influenced by a multitude of factors, many of which lie outside the scope of the health sector. In the public health literature it is often assumed that intersectoral engagement with nonhealth sectors will be instrumental in addressing these social determinants of health. Due to the expected desirable outcomes in population health, several countries have introduced Health in All Policies (HiAP). However, whether this systematic, top-down approach to whole-of-government action (which HiAP entails) is efficient in changing government policies remains unclear. A systematic evaluation of HiAP is therefore much needed. Lawless and colleagues present an evaluation framework for HiAP in their article: "Developing a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia." This work is an important endeavor in addressing this problem (of uncertainty as to whether HiAP is effective) and represents an essential contribution to the HiAP literature. Nonetheless, in the spirit of encouraging ongoing reflection on this topic, we wish to highlight some challenges in the presented framework, which may pose difficulties in operationalization. We find that the evaluation framework faces two main limitations: its unclear causal logic and its level of complexity. We argue that in order to function as a tool for evaluation, the framework should be explicit about the mechanisms of change and enable us to trace whether the assumed causal relations resulted in changes in practice. Developing manageable evaluation frameworks, albeit simplified, may then be an important part of cumulating the theoretical insights aspired in theory-based evaluation. On this basis, we highlight how HiAP processes and healthy public policies respectively involve different mechanisms, and thus argue that different program theories are needed.
机译:众所周知,人口健康受到多种因素的影响,其中许多因素不在卫生部门的范围之内。在公共卫生文献中,通常假设跨部门参与非卫生部门将有助于解决这些健康的社会决定因素。由于预期的人口健康预期可喜结果,一些国家已引入“人人享有所有政策”(HiAP)。但是,尚不清楚这种针对整个政府行动的系统,自上而下的方法(HiAP要求)在改变政府政策方面是否有效。因此,非常需要对HiAP进行系统的评估。 Lawless及其同事在他们的文章中提出了HiAP的评估框架:“开发一种基于程序理论的方法来评估政策过程和结果的框架:南澳大利亚州所有政策中的健康状况。”这项工作是解决这个问题(关于HiAP是否有效的不确定性)的重要努力,并且代表了对HiAP文献的重要贡献。但是,本着鼓励对这一主题进行持续思考的精神,我们希望着重说明提出的框架中的一些挑战,这些挑战可能给运作带来困难。我们发现,评估框架面临两个主要限制:因果逻辑不清楚和复杂程度。我们认为,为了发挥评估工具的作用,该框架应明确说明变化的机制,并使我们能够追踪假设的因果关系是否导致实践发生变化。开发可管理的评估框架(尽管已简化)可能是积累基于理论的评估中的理论见解的重要组成部分。在此基础上,我们强调了HiAP流程和健康的公共政策如何分别涉及不同的机制,因此认为需要不同的计划理论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号