| Literature DB >> 23919727 |
Janya McCalman1, Komla Tsey, Roxanne Bainbridge, Anthony Shakeshaft, Michele Singleton, Christopher Doran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While Aboriginal Australian health providers prioritise identification of local community health needs and strategies, they do not always have the opportunity to access or interpret evidence-based literature to inform health improvement innovations. Research partnerships are therefore important when designing or modifying Aboriginal Australian health improvement initiatives and their evaluation. However, there are few models that outline the pragmatic steps by which research partners negotiate to develop, implement and evaluate community-based initiatives. The objective of this paper is to provide a theoretical model of the tailoring of health improvement initiatives by Aboriginal community-based service providers and partner university researchers. It draws from the case of the Beat da Binge community-initiated youth binge drinking harm reduction project in Yarrabah.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23919727 PMCID: PMC3750544 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-726
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Figure 1Timeline of intervention and data collection events.
Figure 2Proposed theoretical model: to alcohol harm by
The stages of to
| Assembling expertise | Initiating the project by community organisation/s. |
| Developing partnerships with researchers. | |
| Engaging and employing community members who are the target of the project. | |
| Understanding the local situation | Consulting with community organisations and members. |
| Reviewing the relevant intervention and implementation literature. | |
| Establishing a baseline. | |
| Developing local evidence. | |
| Getting the message out | Disseminating health promotion messages through social marketing. |
| Analysing the program logic to determine whether the project aim and strategies are consistent. | |
| Shifting the locus of control for project strategies to community members who are the target of the project. | |
| Assessing the sustainability of the approach. | |
| Reframing the approach | Reflecting on the local evidence and project experience. |
| Developing new understandings of the determinants. | |
| Feeding back project evaluation results to broader community stakeholders. | |
| Collaboratively improving the approach to address revised understandings of the determinants and consider issues of sustainability. |