Public Libraries Have a Key Role to Play in Planetary Health Programs and Initiatives
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A Review of: Patrick, R., Bruges, N., Gunasiri, H., Wang, Y., & Henderson‐Wilson, C. (2025). Healthy me, healthy planet: Evaluation of a pilot planetary health library program. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 36(1), Article e882. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpja.882 Objective – To evaluate the impact of the Healthy Me, Healthy Planet (HMHP) pilot health promotion program, running from December 2021 to August 2022. The program was designed to promote the health benefits of action on climate change to build a climate ready community. Design – Mixed methods design of online quantitative surveys and online qualitative focus groups via Zoom. Setting – Public libraries in Victoria, Australia during the Covid lockdown. Subjects – 136 adults aged 18+ who were members of the public who were program participants, as well as library staff and HMHP delivery partners. Methods – Researchers conducted pre- and post-surveys in English and simplified Chinese using the quantitative Personal Wellbeing Index (PWI) and Environmental Attitudes Inventory (EAI). The pre-surveys were undertaken from December 2021-February 2022 and the post-surveys between the 26th of July and 7th August 2022. A focus group was conducted in July 2022 for program participants, and a second focus group for library staff and HMHO delivery partners. Focus group transcripts were analysed in NViVO using inductive and deductive thematic analysis approaches. Survey and focus group data was triangulated using thematic content analysis. Main Results – The impact evaluation found four main themes: personal health and social-wellbeing, individual capacity building, pro-environmental knowledge, and organisational/community capacity. The authors found that libraries promote meaningful social connections and can use programs like this to create shared community social connections, including intergenerational, on the topics of climate change, sustainability, and healthy environments to alleviate loneliness and isolation and take collective action to adopt pro-environmental behaviours. Public libraries are well placed to deliver these types of programs as trusted community knowledge hubs as they know their communities and can reach populations at every age. As well, libraries are stakeholders for partnership development, empowering communities to take ownership of their health and environmental well-being and engage in pro-environmental behaviour. Conclusion – The HMHP program offers a tested framework for others to adopt to align to health and well-being strategies, particularly around climate change. It highlights the potential benefits of linking health and well-being and planetary health into a joint health promotion, and the value of the use of public libraries as a setting for these types of promotions and programs. It recommends that future programs should prioritise community engagement in the decision-making process, integrate intergenerational aspects more explicitly, and take a systems thinking approach to collaborate with stakeholders across sectors on programs addressing planetary health.
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 | 0,022 | 0,031 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,017 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,028 | 0,024 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,030 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,065 | 0,023 |
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 ».