• 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 Global Health >Classroom club or collective? Three types of community-based group intervention and why they matter for health
【2h】

Classroom club or collective? Three types of community-based group intervention and why they matter for health

机译：课堂俱乐部或集体？基于社区的三种类型的群体干预以及他们为何造成卫生的原因

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

Interventions involving groups of laywomen, men and adolescents to promote health are increasingly popular, but past research has rarely distinguished between different types of intervention with groups. We introduce a simple typology that distinguishes three ideal types: classrooms, clubs and collectives. Classrooms treat groups as a platform for reaching a population with didactic behaviour change strategies. Clubs seek to build, strengthen and leverage relationships between group members to promote health. Collectives engage whole communities in assuming ownership over a health problem and taking action to address it. We argue that this distinction goes a long way towards explaining differences in achievable health outcomes using interventions with groups. First, classrooms and clubs are appropriate when policymakers primarily care about improving the health of group members, but collectives are better placed to achieve population-level impact. Second, classroom interventions implicitly assume bottleneck behaviours preventing a health outcome from being achieved can be reliably identified by experts, whereas collectives make use of local knowledge, skill and creativity to tackle complexity. Third, classroom interventions assume individual participants can address health issues largely on their own, while clubs and collectives are required to engender collective action in support of health. We invite public health researchers and policymakers to use our framework to align their own and communities’ ambitions with appropriate group-based interventions to test and implement for their context. We caution that our typology is meant to apply to groups of laypeople rather than professionalised groups such as whole civil society organisations.
机译：涉及林门，男子和青少年群体促进健康的干预越来越受欢迎，但过去的研究很少区分不同类型的群体。我们介绍了一种简单的类型，可区分三种理想类型：教室，俱乐部和集体。教室将群体视为与教学行为改变策略的达到人口的平台。俱乐部寻求建立，加强和利用集团成员之间的关系，以促进健康。集体聘请整个社区承担对健康问题的所有权并采取行动来解决它。我们认为，这种区别在利用与团体的干预措施解释可实现的健康结果的差异很长。首先，当政策制定者主要关心改善小组成员的健康时，教室和俱乐部是合适的，但收集率更好地达到人口水平的影响。其次，课堂干预隐含地假设可以通过专家可靠地确定防止替代造成健康结果的瓶颈行为，而专家可以利用当地知识，技能和创造力来解决复杂性。第三，课堂干预措施假设个别参与者可以在很大程度上以自己的方式解决健康问题，而俱乐部和集体则需要参加支持健康的集体行动。我们邀请公共卫生研究人员和政策制定者使用我们的框架，以适当的基于团体的干预措施对齐自己的和社区的野心，以便为其上下文进行测试和实施。我们谨慎，我们的类型是申请于外国人组织，而不是整个民间社会组织等专业团体。

著录项

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