Taking account of context in population health intervention research: guidance for producers, users and funders of research
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Population health intervention research (PHIR) seeks to develop and evaluate policies, programmes and other types of interventions that may affect population health and health equity. Such interventions are strongly influenced by context – taken to refer to any feature of the circumstances in which an intervention is conceived, developed, implemented and evaluated. Understanding how interventions relate to context is critical to understanding how they work; why they sometimes fail; whether they can be successfully adapted, scaled up or translated from one context to another; why their impacts vary; and how far effects observed in one context can be generalised to others. Concerns that context has been neglected in research to develop and evaluate population health interventions have been expressed for at least 20 years. Over this period, an increasingly comprehensive body of guidance has been developed to help with the design, conduct, reporting and appraisal of PHIR. References to context have become more frequent in recent years, as interest has grown in complex and upstream interventions, systems thinking and realist approaches to evaluation, but there remains a lack of systematic guidance for producers, users and funders of PHIR on how context should be taken into account. This document draws together recent thinking and practical experience of addressing context within PHIR. It provides a broad, working definition of context and explains why and how context is important to PHIR. It identifies the dimensions of context that are likely to shape how interventions are conceptualised, the impacts that they have and how they can be implemented, translated and scaled up. It suggests how context should be taken into account throughout the PHIR process, from priority setting and intervention development to the design and conduct of evaluations and reporting, synthesis and knowledge exchange. It concludes by summarising the key messages for producers, users and funders of PHIR and suggesting priorities for future research. The document is meant to be used alongside existing guidance for the development, evaluation and reporting of population health interventions. We expect the guidance to evolve over time, as practice changes in the light of the guidance and experience accumulates on useful approaches. The work was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca) – Institute of Population and Public Health (CIHR-IPPH) and the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).
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.
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 | 0,050 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 découle