Valerie Michaelson1, Kelly A Pilato1, Colleen M Davison2. 1. Department of Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, Canada. 2. Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The family is a key setting for health promotion. Contemporary health promoting family models can establish scaffolds for shaping health behaviors and can be useful tools for education and health promotion. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this scoping review is to provide details as to how conceptual and theoretical models of the health promoting potential of the family are being used in health promotion contexts. DESIGN: Guided by PRISMA ScR guidelines, we used a three-step search strategy to find relevant papers. This included key-word searching electronic databases (Medline, PSycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL), searching the reference lists of included studies, and intentionally searching for grey literature (in textbooks, dissertations, thesis manuscripts and reports.). RESULTS: After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, the overall search generated 113 included manuscripts/chapters with 118 unique models. Through our analysis of these models, three main themes were apparent: 1) ecological factors are central components to most models or conceptual frameworks; 2) models were attentive to cultural and other diversities, allowing room for a wide range of differences across family types, and for different and ever-expanding social norms and roles; and 3) the role of the child as a passive recipient of their health journey rather than as an active agent in promoting their own family health was highlighted as an important gap in many of the identified models. CONCLUSIONS: This review contributes a synthesis of contemporary literature in this area and supports the priority of ecological frameworks and diversity of family contexts. It encourages researchers, practitioners and family stakeholders to recognize the value of the child as an active agent in shaping the health promoting potential of their family context.
BACKGROUND: The family is a key setting for health promotion. Contemporary health promoting family models can establish scaffolds for shaping health behaviors and can be useful tools for education and health promotion. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this scoping review is to provide details as to how conceptual and theoretical models of the health promoting potential of the family are being used in health promotion contexts. DESIGN: Guided by PRISMA ScR guidelines, we used a three-step search strategy to find relevant papers. This included key-word searching electronic databases (Medline, PSycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL), searching the reference lists of included studies, and intentionally searching for grey literature (in textbooks, dissertations, thesis manuscripts and reports.). RESULTS: After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, the overall search generated 113 included manuscripts/chapters with 118 unique models. Through our analysis of these models, three main themes were apparent: 1) ecological factors are central components to most models or conceptual frameworks; 2) models were attentive to cultural and other diversities, allowing room for a wide range of differences across family types, and for different and ever-expanding social norms and roles; and 3) the role of the child as a passive recipient of their health journey rather than as an active agent in promoting their own family health was highlighted as an important gap in many of the identified models. CONCLUSIONS: This review contributes a synthesis of contemporary literature in this area and supports the priority of ecological frameworks and diversity of family contexts. It encourages researchers, practitioners and family stakeholders to recognize the value of the child as an active agent in shaping the health promoting potential of their family context.
Authors: Howard Dubowitz; Rae R Newton; Alan J Litrownik; Terri Lewis; Ernestine C Briggs; Richard Thompson; Diana English; Li-Ching Lee; Margaret M Feerick Journal: Child Maltreat Date: 2005-05
Authors: Autumn L DeLorme; Erika R Gavenus; Charles R Salmen; Gor Ouma Benard; Brian Mattah; Elizabeth Bukusi; Kathryn J Fiorella Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2017-11-20 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Justin M Guagliano; Helen Elizabeth Brown; Emma Coombes; Elizabeth S Haines; Claire Hughes; Andrew P Jones; Katie L Morton; Esther van Sluijs Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-10-28 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Sanghamitra Pati; Abhinav Sinha; Shishirendu Ghosal; Sushmita Kerketta; John Tayu Lee; Srikanta Kanungo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-10 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Enrique Alonso-Perez; Paul Gellert; Michaela Kreyenfeld; Julie Lorraine O'Sullivan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-19 Impact factor: 4.614