Reflecting on community practice in health promotion in Europe - where now?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Scope and rationale: This workshop will discuss contemporary issues around developing and sustaining community practice in health promotion in Europe. In 1986, the Ottawa Charter signified the importance of strengthening community action to health promotion. Health 2020 and many other international statements and reviews have since endorsed community empowerment as a core strategy for achieving better population health and reducing the health gap. Despite a shared vision, and an increasing evidence base to support practice, there are challenges for those wishing to build impactful community-centred approaches as an integral part of public health. If we are to sustain and empower resilient and healthy communities, then there is a need for honest reflection on what has been learnt so far, why we are some way from achieving genuinely people-centred health systems and where future directions lie. Objectives: The aim of this workshop is to stimulate discussion on the current ‘state of play’ of community-based health promotion practice in Europe. A key learning objective is for workshop participants to identify how health promotors can best work to support community-led action through planning, programme implementation and capacity building. A further objective is to set the first building blocks of a EUPHA network on the science of community engagement that would also collaborate with the Health Promotion section. Format: A skills building, interactive workshop with a focus on collaborative learning. Those attending will be encouraged to share learning about working within complex systems to build resilient and healthy communities and to reflect on practice within different contexts in Europe. Following an introduction and two brief presentations to stimulate thinking about the realities of community-centred prevention, delegates will be asked to consider key questions on programme theory, empowerment and evaluation: •How to deal with the nature of the properties of complex systems in our community practice and evaluation. •How to describe our actions in the field of community health and health promotion in ways that communicate programme theories and models to others and also that emancipate ourselves from a linear causality perspective. •How to ensure programmes are genuinely community-led and can support emerging community leaders. We will conclude with a summary of workshop themes and actions to take forward to strengthen community-based health promotion practice. An interactive workshop on contemporary issues for community-centred health promotion practice and evaluation Delegates will share learning on obstacles and solutions to building empowered and resilient communities and how to improve programme theory and evidence
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».