Rebecca Armstrong1, Jodie Doyle, Chris Lamb, Elizabeth Waters. 1. Cochrane Health Promotion and Public Health Field, VicHealth, 15-31 Pelham St, PO Box 154, Carlton South VIC 3053, Melbourne, Australia. rarmstrong@vichealth.vic.gov.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence-informed health promotion and public health is an emerging and ever-changing theme in research and practice. A collaborative approach to gathering and applying evidence is crucial to implementing effective multi-sectoral health promotion and public health interventions for improved population outcomes. This paper presents an argument for the development of multi-sector evidence and discusses both facilitators and challenges to this process. METHODS: Sector-specific contacts familiar with decision-making processes were selected from referrals gained through academic, government and non-government networks and interviewed (in-person or via telephone) as part of a small scale study to scope the use of evidence within non-health sectors where decisions are likely to impact on public health. RESULTS: The views gathered are preliminary, and this analysis would benefit from more extensive consultation. Nonetheless, information gathered from the interviews and literature search provide valuable insights into evidence-related decision-making paradigms which demonstrate similarities with, and differences from, those found in the health sector. CONCLUSIONS: Decisions in health promotion and public may benefit from consideration of the ways in which disciplines and sectors can work together to inform policy and practice.
BACKGROUND: Evidence-informed health promotion and public health is an emerging and ever-changing theme in research and practice. A collaborative approach to gathering and applying evidence is crucial to implementing effective multi-sectoral health promotion and public health interventions for improved population outcomes. This paper presents an argument for the development of multi-sector evidence and discusses both facilitators and challenges to this process. METHODS: Sector-specific contacts familiar with decision-making processes were selected from referrals gained through academic, government and non-government networks and interviewed (in-person or via telephone) as part of a small scale study to scope the use of evidence within non-health sectors where decisions are likely to impact on public health. RESULTS: The views gathered are preliminary, and this analysis would benefit from more extensive consultation. Nonetheless, information gathered from the interviews and literature search provide valuable insights into evidence-related decision-making paradigms which demonstrate similarities with, and differences from, those found in the health sector. CONCLUSIONS: Decisions in health promotion and public may benefit from consideration of the ways in which disciplines and sectors can work together to inform policy and practice.
Authors: Ross C Brownson; Rodrigo S Reis; Peg Allen; Kathleen Duggan; Robert Fields; Katherine A Stamatakis; Paul C Erwin Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Lois Orton; Ffion Lloyd-Williams; David Taylor-Robinson; Martin O'Flaherty; Simon Capewell Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-07-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marie-Jeanne Aarts; Ien A M van de Goor; Hans A M van Oers; Albertine J Schuit Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2009-10-27 Impact factor: 3.295