• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>BMJ Open Access >A dose of realism for healthy urban policy: lessons from area-based initiatives in the UK
【2h】

A dose of realism for healthy urban policy: lessons from area-based initiatives in the UK

机译：对健康的城市政策充满现实感：英国基于区域的计划的教训

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Many urban policies aim to improve areas and address socioeconomic deprivation. The resulting investment is often delivered through area-based programmes which incorporate initiatives to improve the physical, social and economic environment. Hypotheses that these investments can contribute to wider public health strategies are based on epidemiological data and used to support the concept of healthy urban policy. However, there is little evidence on their ability to generate positive impacts on socioeconomic or health outcomes. The lack of validating evidence on actual impacts raises two important questions: (1) Is area-based investment an effective strategy to tackle socioeconomic deprivation? (2) What is the prospect for new and improved evaluations to provide stronger evidence? Both the programmes of area investment and their accompanying evaluations have been criticised for being overly ambitious in what can be achieved by the investment and what can be measured by an evaluation. Area-based approaches to tackling deprivation have their advantages but a mix of area and individual-level targeting is likely to be needed. While there is scope to improve the utility of evaluation data there are also inevitable constraints on assessing and attributing impacts from urban investment. The inherent limitations to an area-based approach and the ongoing constraints on impact evaluation will inevitably temper expectations of what healthy urban policy can achieve. However, lack of evidence is not grounds to abandon the concept of healthy urban policy; adoption of more realistic expectations together with improved evaluation data may help to increase its credibility.
机译：许多城市政策旨在改善面积并解决社会经济贫困问题。由此产生的投资通常是通过基于地区的计划交付的，该计划结合了旨在改善自然，社会和经济环境的举措。这些投资可以促进更广泛的公共卫生策略的假设是基于流行病学数据，并用于支持健康的城市政策概念。但是，几乎没有证据表明它们能够对社会经济或健康结果产生积极影响。缺乏关于实际影响的有效证据提出了两个重要问题：（1）区域投资是否是解决社会经济贫困的有效策略？ （2）进行新的和改进的评估以提供有力证据的前景如何？区域投资计划及其伴随的评估都被批评为对投资可以实现的目标和评估可以衡量的目标过于雄心勃勃。基于区域的解决贫困的方法具有其优势，但可能需要将区域和个人层面的目标结合起来。尽管有改善评估数据效用的余地，但在评估和归因于城市投资的影响方面也不可避免地受到限制。基于区域的方法的固有局限性以及对影响评估的持续限制将不可避免地削弱人们对健康城市政策可以实现的期望。但是，缺乏证据并不是放弃健康城市政策概念的理由。采用更切合实际的期望以及改进的评估数据可能有助于提高其信誉。

著录项

  • 期刊名称 BMJ Open Access
  • 作者

    H Thomson;

  • 作者单位
  • 年(卷),期 -1(62),10
  • 年度 -1
  • 页码 932–936
  • 总页数 5
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号