| Literature DB >> 23217590 |
Leah Frerichs1, Jeri Brittin, Catherine Stewart, Regina Robbins, Cara Riggs, Susan Mayberger, Alberto Cervantes, Terry T-K Huang.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity rates in minority populations continue to rise despite leveling national trends. Although interventions that address social and environmental factors exist, processes that create demand for policy and environmental change within communities have not been identified. COMMUNITY CONTEXT: We developed a pilot program in South Omaha, a Nebraska Latino community, based on the community readiness model (CRM), called SaludableOmaha. We used CRM to explore the potential of youth advocacy to shift individual and community norms regarding obesity prevention in South Omaha and to advocate for health-promoting community environments.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23217590 PMCID: PMC3523892 DOI: 10.5888/pcd9.120095
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Chronic Dis ISSN: 1545-1151 Impact factor: 2.830
Average Community Readiness Model (CRM) Scoresa, SaludableOmaha, 2011–2012
| CRM Dimension | Community Leaders (n = 10) | Parents (n = 8) |
|---|---|---|
| Efforts | 6.9 | 4.8 |
| Knowledge of efforts | 3.3 | 2.8 |
| Leadership | 3.2 | 2.1 |
| Community climate | 2.6 | 2.4 |
| Knowledge of issue | 2.2 | 2.4 |
| Resources | 3.4 | 3.0 |
| CRM stage | 3 | 2 |
Abbreviations: MS, veterans with multiple sclerosis; GV, general veteran population; GP, general population.
Scores are calculated for each dimension by averaging anchored rating across all interviews. The anchored scales range in whole numbers from 1 to 9 for each dimension; 9 represents the most favorable score.
Anchored rating scales are defined for 6 dimensions of readiness identified by the CRM (10) and used to score each interview.
The average score across dimensions, rounded down, corresponds to the overall community readiness stage.
FigureProposed model for a horizontally and vertically integrated social movement, based on the experiences of SaludableOmaha, to guide further research on the potential underlying mechanisms of such a social movement.
| Stage 1. No awareness | Issue is not generally recognized by the community or leaders as a problem (or it may not be an issue). |
| Stage 2. Denial/resistance | At least some community members recognize that the issue is a concern, but there is little recognition that it might be occurring locally. |
| Stage 3. Vague awareness | Most feel that there is a local concern, but there is no immediate motivation to do anything about it. |
| Stage 4. Preplanning | There is clear recognition that something must be done, and there may even be a group addressing the issue. However, efforts are not focused or detailed. |
| Stage 5. Preparation | Active leaders begin planning in earnest. Community offers modest support of efforts. |
| Stage 6. Initiation | Enough information is available to justify efforts. Activities are under way. |
| Stage 7. Stabilization | Activities are supported by administrators or community decision makers. Staff are trained and experienced. |
| Stage 8. Confirmation/expansion | Efforts are in place. Community members feel comfortable using services, and they support expansions. Local data are regularly obtained. |
| Stage 9. High level of community ownership | Detailed and sophisticated knowledge exists about prevalence, causes, and consequences. Effective evaluation guides new directions. Model is applied to other issues. |