2.I. Workshop: Implementing local health equity policies in Europe – Needs, governance and tools
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The effects of health inequalities within and between European countries are widely recognized, and reducing health inequalities is on the agenda of many countries. Despite an increasing concern and awareness on health inequalities, a wide gap exists in Europe in terms of political response. Health is created and lived by people within the settings of their everyday life; where they learn, work, play and love. Healthy urban development has a great potential to reduce health inequalities. Healthy living environments can only be created if sectors other than the health sector are involved. Health in all policies (HiAP) is an approach promoted by WHO since the Ottawa Charta (1986). It acknowledges the need for an integrated approach to health involving different policy fields. The reduction of health inequalities is one core aim. Including HiAP is a smart - and feasible - policy choice and one concrete measure it to use prospective Health Impact Assessment focusing on equity. Working with other government sectors requires an understanding of different mandates and goals, and may involve crossing administrative and budgetary barriers between sectors. Different policy actors and professional disciplines have their own languages and approaches to the problems and opportunities in societal development. For this reason, HiAP needs to promote an understanding of the language, goals and working methods across government sectors. Municipal governments need to build trusting and collaborative relationships both between internal sector silos, and across stakeholders within society. The municipal context offers comprehensive entry points for action. Municipalities seek to provide education throughout the life course, create appropriate conditions for housing as well as for physical activity and healthy eating. Municipalities can also promote the creation of a stable ecosystem. Moreover, a focus on municipalities addresses the local political context, local political regulations and urban or rural planning and development, which are important contributions to improving living conditions. There is valid information on health, health inequalities and its determinants available, but the information is not automatically transformed to concrete policy actions and measures. Besides knowledge, policy implementation requires many other elements to be effective: political will and commitment, collaboration, resources and governance. This session presents current findings and actions in the frame of the EU Joint Action Health Equity Europe (JAHEE). The first contribution includes an analysis of specific governance aspects for healthy living environments that are being addressed in JAHEE: How is the process from needs to decision-making to actions done by the participating 13 countries? After that, 4 examples from the Netherlands, Italy and Spain will describe their needs, governance and tools while implementing local health equity policies in their own context. Key messages The local level is the place where many determinants of health can be shaped and where Health and Equity in all Policies can be realized in an innovative way. There are many existing examples for tools and governance for local health equity policies that can be transferred to other places.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,028 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,010 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,021 | 0,004 |
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; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».