Mapping healthy planning frameworks.

IF 3.5 4区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Perspectives in Public Health Pub Date : 2023-10-31 DOI:10.1177/17579139231205494
A De La Haye, A Jones, S van Herk, M Rofin-Serra, A A Lake, H J Moore
{"title":"Mapping healthy planning frameworks.","authors":"A De La Haye,&nbsp;A Jones,&nbsp;S van Herk,&nbsp;M Rofin-Serra,&nbsp;A A Lake,&nbsp;H J Moore","doi":"10.1177/17579139231205494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this research was to map available healthy planning frameworks to discover the range, composition, design, and implementation of healthy planning frameworks.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic scoping review with date, location, and usability limitations was augmented by a grey literature search. Data were extracted on key details, design, outcomes considered, and implementation features of the final 61 frameworks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data extracted indicated that most frameworks tend to focus on one element of the built environment, with active mobility, active environments, and transport being the most prevalent ones (34%). Most frameworks (40) stated their intended outcomes on health in general terms, rather than targeting specific health outcomes. Very few frameworks (12%) were aimed at the public, and only 11% of frameworks included an evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While there are a wide variety and number of frameworks available in the field of healthy urban planning, they are generally siloed, focusing on highly specific individual urban determinants, and rarely consider health outcomes in detail. There is significantly less provision available for citizen and community use. Frameworks tend to offer limited updating mechanisms and very rarely include ongoing evaluation processes, making their success difficult to assess.</p>","PeriodicalId":47256,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives in Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives in Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17579139231205494","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this research was to map available healthy planning frameworks to discover the range, composition, design, and implementation of healthy planning frameworks.

Methods: A systematic scoping review with date, location, and usability limitations was augmented by a grey literature search. Data were extracted on key details, design, outcomes considered, and implementation features of the final 61 frameworks.

Results: Data extracted indicated that most frameworks tend to focus on one element of the built environment, with active mobility, active environments, and transport being the most prevalent ones (34%). Most frameworks (40) stated their intended outcomes on health in general terms, rather than targeting specific health outcomes. Very few frameworks (12%) were aimed at the public, and only 11% of frameworks included an evaluation.

Conclusions: While there are a wide variety and number of frameworks available in the field of healthy urban planning, they are generally siloed, focusing on highly specific individual urban determinants, and rarely consider health outcomes in detail. There is significantly less provision available for citizen and community use. Frameworks tend to offer limited updating mechanisms and very rarely include ongoing evaluation processes, making their success difficult to assess.

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
制定健康的规划框架。
目的:本研究的目的是绘制可用的健康规划框架,以发现健康规划框架的范围、组成、设计和实施。方法:通过灰色文献检索,对日期、地点和可用性限制进行系统的范围界定综述。提取了关于最后61个框架的关键细节、设计、考虑的结果和实施特点的数据。结果:提取的数据表明,大多数框架倾向于关注构建环境的一个元素,其中活跃的移动性、活跃的环境和运输是最普遍的(34%)。大多数框架(40)笼统地阐述了其在健康方面的预期结果,而不是针对具体的健康结果。很少有框架(12%)是针对公众的,只有11%的框架包含评估。结论:虽然健康城市规划领域有各种各样的框架,但它们通常是孤立的,侧重于高度具体的个别城市决定因素,很少详细考虑健康结果。可供公民和社区使用的物资明显减少。框架往往提供有限的更新机制,很少包括正在进行的评估过程,因此难以评估其成功与否。
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
Perspectives in Public Health
Perspectives in Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
1.70%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Perspectives in Public Health is a bi-monthly peer-reviewed journal. It is practice orientated and features current topics and opinions; news and views on current health issues; case studies; book reviews; letters to the Editor; as well as updates on the Society"s work. The journal also commissions articles for themed issues and publishes original peer-reviewed articles. Perspectives in Public Health"s primary aim is to be an invaluable resource for the Society"s members, who are health-promoting professionals from many disciplines, including environmental health, health protection, health and safety, food safety and nutrition, building and engineering, primary care, academia and government.
期刊最新文献
Food and exercise practices among British Pakistanis; how can Bourdieu's theory of practice help to understand them? Evaluating the impact of the Health Access for Refugees Project on people who are refugees or seeking asylum in Northern England. Rethinking culture: a narrative review on the evolving role of museum and art gallery-based heritage activities and programmes on wellbeing. Participatory asset mapping and photovoice interviews to scope cultural and community resources to reduce alcohol harm in Chitwan, Nepal. Creative health in the urban Global South: barriers and facilitators in the cases of Cochabamba and Salvador.
×
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