Perspectives in Public Health最新文献

Aims: Previous evidence suggests that engagement with heritage such as visiting heritage sites provides benefits for people's mental and social wellbeing, and helps to establish social capital. However, far less is known about whether living in areas of historic built environment also helps build social capital. Furthermore, it remains unclear how the association between historic built environment and social capital may vary across heritage engagement frequency and areas of deprivation levels. This study was therefore designed to explore the cross-sectional relationship between historic built environment and social capital.

Methods: Analysis was based on three datasets: Understanding Society: The UK Household Longitudinal Study Waves 5 (2013/2015) and 6 (2014/2016), 2019 National Heritage List for England, and 2015 English Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). Ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions were applied to estimate the relationships between historic built environment (listed buildings, scheduled monuments, and registered parks and gardens) and social capital (personal relationships, social network support, civic engagement, and trust and cooperative norms).

Results: We found that people living in places with greater historic built environment experienced higher levels of personal relationships, social network support, and civic engagement. However, these associations were attenuated once rurality was adjusted. Individuals living in areas of greater levels of historic built environment displayed higher levels of trust and cooperative norms, even after adjusting for all relevant covariates. Heritage engagement frequency was found to moderate the association between historic built environment and personal relationships. Similarly, IMD was also found to moderate the association between historic built environment and trust and cooperative norms.

Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of neighbourhood environment in building social capital in communities. Particularly, areas with heritage assets may provide both socially inviting and aesthetically pleasing environments that could help strengthen community and restore pride in place.

Aims: The middle-out perspective (MOP) provides a lens to examine how actors positioned between government (top) and individuals (bottom) act to promote broader societal changes from the middle-out (rather than the top-down or bottom-up). The MOP has been used in recent years in the fields of energy, climate change, and development studies. We argue that public health practitioners involved with advocacy activities and creating alliances to amplify health promotion actions will be familiar with the general MOP concept if not the formal name. The article aims to demonstrate this argument.

Methods: This article introduces the MOP conceptual framework and customises it for a public health audience by positioning it among existing concepts and theories for actions within public health. Using two UK case studies (increasing signalised crossing times for pedestrians and the campaign for smoke-free legislation), we illustrate who middle actors are and what they can do to result in better public health outcomes.

Results: These case studies show that involving a wider range of middle actors, including those not traditionally involved in improving the public's health, can broaden the range and reach of organisations and individuals involving in advocating for public health measures. They also demonstrate that middle actors are not neutral. They can be recruited to improve public health outcomes, but they may also be exploited by commercial interests to block healthy policies or even promote a health-diminishing agenda.

Conclusion: Using the MOP as a formal approach can help public health organisations and practitioners consider potential 'allies' from outside traditional health-related bodies or professions. Formal mapping can expand the range of who are considered potential middle actors for a particular public health issue. By applying the MOP, public health organisations and staff can enlist the additional leverage that is brought to bear by involving additional middle actors in improving the public's health.

Aims: Considerable number of studies in the existing literature indicate the existence of stigma related to many diseases, disabilities, and disorders, but less attention has been given to diabetes-related stigma. This narrative review of literature aims to explore the existence of stigma surrounding type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).

Methods: Literature were searched using search engines, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus electronic databases published from year 2000 to 2020. Both qualitative and quantitative studies focusing on the stigma associated with T1DM were included. A total of 21 articles met the inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis of collected research material was done.

Results: Results provided substantial evidence that stigma associated with T1DM was experienced by T1DM patients and their caregivers at some point in their lives and it had affected their lives in different domains such as difficulty finding a spouse, discrimination at employment opportunities, educational institutions, management of disease, being misjudged as a druggie, poor quality of life of the patient and caregiver, depressive symptoms among parents of patients, constant worrying of their child's disease management, and so on.

Conclusion: Stigma related to T1DM is experienced by individuals suffering from it, and it is widespread. It not only affects the sufferers but their loved ones also. To reduce and cope-up with stigma, there is a need to increase public education and awareness at a mass level. Further research and awareness will serve to build our understanding of the experience of diabetes-related stigma.

Aims: Local authorities in England are responsible for public health and health promotion. This article sought to explore how research and decision-making co-exist in a local authority in England.

Methods: An Embedded Researcher was based within the local authority and used qualitative methodology to address the research aim. Interviews and focus groups were employed to ascertain a range of stakeholder views in the local authority. All transcripts were coded on NVivo 12 by the Embedded Researcher and two members of the research team cross-checked a sample for coding accuracy. Data were analysed using framework analysis.

Results: The data suggest several barriers to using research to inform decision-making in health promotion and public health. The study shows that research is valued in local authorities, but not always privileged - this is due to cultural factors and practical political reasons which often means that decisions need to be made expediently. Participants outlined a juxtaposition between academic credibility; timeliness to complete the research and the financial cost associated with it; against the independence and credibility that independent academics could bring.

Conclusion: Policy formulation and delivery is an integral aspect of health promotion and critical to achieving improved population health and reductions in health inequalities. However, there exists tensions between gathering research evidence and making research-informed decisions. The article concludes by advocating the use of Embedded Researchers to fully understand how research is gathered and used to support public health and health promotion policymaking.

Aims: Rapid intervention development, implementation, and evaluation are required for emergency public health contexts, such as the recent COVID-19 pandemic. A novel Agile Co-production and Evaluation (ACE) framework has been developed to assist this endeavour in future public health emergencies. This scoping review aimed to map available behavioural science resources that can be used to develop and evaluate public health guidance, messaging, and interventions in emergency contexts onto components of ACE: rapid development and implementation, co-production with patients or the public including seldom heard voices from diverse communities, and inclusion of evaluation.

Methods: A scoping review methodology was used. Searches were run on MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Google, with search terms covering emergency response and behavioural science. Articles published since 2014 and which discussed a framework or guidance for using behavioural science in response to a public health emergency were included. A narrative synthesis was conducted.

Results: Seventeen records were included in the synthesis. The records covered a range of emergency contexts, the most frequent of which were COVID-19 (n = 7) and non-specific emergencies (n = 4). One record evaluated existing approaches, 6 proposed new approaches, and 10 described existing approaches. Commonly used approaches included the Behavioural Change Wheel; Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Behaviour model; and social identity theory. Three records discuss co-production with the target audience and consideration of diverse populations. Four records incorporate rapid testing, evaluation, or validation methods. Six records state that their approaches are designed to be implemented rapidly. No records cover all components of ACE.

Conclusion: We recommend that future research explores how to create guidance involving rapid implementation, co-production with patients or the public including seldom heard voices from diverse communities, and evaluation.