Can Place-Based Modifications Make a Difference to Local Health Inequalities in Urban Essex: An Evaluation Protocol

K. Cusimano, P. Freeman, A. Pettican, A. J. Brinkley
{"title":"Can Place-Based Modifications Make a Difference to Local Health Inequalities in Urban Essex: An Evaluation Protocol","authors":"K. Cusimano, P. Freeman, A. Pettican, A. J. Brinkley","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.29.24312816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stemming from a complex picture of compositional, contextual and wider determinants, health inequalities are presented at the level in which people reside (i.e., their place). Examples of this exist within Essex, England, where despite seeming affluence, pockets of high multiple deprivation exist. Programmes delivered across the system representing each place may provide a solution to these complex challenges. For this reason, Epping Forest District Council commissioned the evaluation of a programme representing two place-based projects within their district (i.e., Limes Farm and Oakwood Hill). This paper provides the evaluation protocol for this programme. Broadly, the evaluation seeks to investigate the design, implementation, mechanisms and effectiveness of both projects. Our evaluation is underpinned by the Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines for the design, evaluation and implementation for complex interventions, and takes inspiration from a realist approach. We aim to understand <em>where</em> each project works, <em>who</em> does the projects work for, <em>what</em> impact do the projects have, and <em>how</em> and <em>why</em> does the projects work. This will be achieved through a mixed-methods approach which utilises a cohort study, ripple-effects mapping, focus groups, and secondary data analysis. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive, general linear and multi- level models, while qualitative data will be understood using visualisation (ripple-effects maps) and reflexive thematic analysis. Data will be triangulated to create programme theory configurations, which explain the outcomes which stemming from the programme, and how these are shaped by mechanisms within a given context. We anticipate our novel and robust approach to contribute to policy surrounding the adoption and implementation of place-based approaches.","PeriodicalId":501276,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Public and Global Health","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Public and Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.29.24312816","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Stemming from a complex picture of compositional, contextual and wider determinants, health inequalities are presented at the level in which people reside (i.e., their place). Examples of this exist within Essex, England, where despite seeming affluence, pockets of high multiple deprivation exist. Programmes delivered across the system representing each place may provide a solution to these complex challenges. For this reason, Epping Forest District Council commissioned the evaluation of a programme representing two place-based projects within their district (i.e., Limes Farm and Oakwood Hill). This paper provides the evaluation protocol for this programme. Broadly, the evaluation seeks to investigate the design, implementation, mechanisms and effectiveness of both projects. Our evaluation is underpinned by the Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines for the design, evaluation and implementation for complex interventions, and takes inspiration from a realist approach. We aim to understand where each project works, who does the projects work for, what impact do the projects have, and how and why does the projects work. This will be achieved through a mixed-methods approach which utilises a cohort study, ripple-effects mapping, focus groups, and secondary data analysis. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive, general linear and multi- level models, while qualitative data will be understood using visualisation (ripple-effects maps) and reflexive thematic analysis. Data will be triangulated to create programme theory configurations, which explain the outcomes which stemming from the programme, and how these are shaped by mechanisms within a given context. We anticipate our novel and robust approach to contribute to policy surrounding the adoption and implementation of place-based approaches.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在埃塞克斯郡的城市中,以地方为基础的改造能否改变当地的健康不平等现象:评估协议
健康不平等源于复杂的构成、背景和更广泛的决定因素,体现在人们所居住的层面(即他们所在的地方)。在英格兰埃塞克斯郡就有这样的例子,尽管该地区看似富裕,但却存在大量多重贫困地区。在代表每个地方的整个系统中实施的计划可以为这些复杂的挑战提供解决方案。为此,埃平森林区议会委托对代表其区内两个以地方为基础的项目(即莱姆斯农场和奥克伍德山)的计划进行评估。本文提供了该计划的评估规程。从广义上讲,评估旨在研究这两个项目的设计、实施、机制和效果。我们的评估以医学研究委员会(MRC)关于复杂干预措施的设计、评估和实施指南为基础,并从现实主义方法中汲取灵感。我们的目标是了解每个项目在哪里开展工作,为谁开展工作,产生了什么影响,以及如何和为什么开展工作。为此,我们将采用混合方法,包括队列研究、涟漪效应绘图、焦点小组和二手数据分析。定量数据将使用描述性、一般线性和多层次模型进行分析,而定性数据将使用可视化(涟漪效应图)和反思性专题分析进行理解。我们将对数据进行三角测量,以创建计划理论配置,解释计划产生的结果,以及这些结果是如何在特定环境中通过机制形成的。我们预计,我们新颖而稳健的方法将有助于围绕以地方为基础的方法的采用和实施制定政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Qualitative Study of User Experiences in Harm Reduction Programs Development and validation of a 5-year risk model using mammogram risk scores generated from screening digital breast tomosynthesis Causes of Pediatric Deaths in Lusaka, Zambia: A Quantitative Geographic Information Systems Approach Health professionals beliefs and attitudes towards preconception care: A systematic review A systematic review of psychological factors influencing attitudes and intentions toward, and uptake of, Covid-19 vaccines in adolescents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1