Cocreation of Integrated Interventions Addressing Noncommunicable Diseases and Environmental Degradation: Protocol for a Participatory Qualitative Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Addressing the adverse impacts of climate change on human health requires a global effort across multiple sectors. People living in low- and middle-income countries are particularly vulnerable to the health crises induced by climate change. Therefore, context specific solutions to tackle such challenges are essential to ensure preventive measures are in place for mitigating such risks. OBJECTIVE: This protocol aims to outline an integrated, participatory approach to cocreate multisectoral interventions tailored to specific environmental and health challenges in Bangladesh, India, and Indonesia. This work is done as part of the Global Health Research Centre for Non-Communicable Diseases and Environmental Change, funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research. The overall aim is to collaboratively design and assess interventions that deliver dual benefits for planetary and human health. METHODS: To address the multisectoral nature of the challenges, this study will adopt a cocreation methodology that blends co-design and coproduction approaches. While the problem areas are specific to each context-tackling air pollution due to plastic burning in Indonesia, improving dietary diversity of public food procurement systems and managing extreme heat in India, and mitigating drinking water salinity in Bangladesh-the underlying cocreation framework is consistent and can be adapted to the needs of each study setting. The workflow consists of 4 key stages guided by an existing cocreation framework: planning, developing, evaluation, and reporting, with the 6 core elements of the Medical Research Council's complex intervention development framework embedded throughout the process. Drawing on the Double Diamond design process, the cocreation stage involves the following phases: codevelopment of a theory of change to explore potential context-specific interventions, short-listing of intervention components through gap analysis and prioritization, co-designing and coproducing selected intervention components, and assessing appropriateness and feasibility of intervention implementation. The cocreation process will be evaluated using the Research Quality Plus for Co‑Production framework to ensure methodological rigor and quality. RESULTS: Cocreation will take place over 6 months. Sampling and recruitment of cocreators (key stakeholders across sectors) have been completed in all 3 countries, with each cocreator group consisting of 20-30 members. We have developed the tools for the cocreation phase, informed by the findings from formative research, and received the necessary ethics approval to conduct these activities. We will generate a series of academic and nonacademic outputs on the cocreation process to disseminate the findings, as well as training materials for implementers to facilitate future adoption in similar settings. CONCLUSIONS: The cocreation of multisectoral interventions to tackle both environmental change and health is a comparatively new domain of implementation research. This protocol addresses the complex, multidimensional, and unique nature of such interventions by developing a structured and scientifically sound approach to be implemented in real-life settings. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/80368.
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 | 0,153 | 0,104 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,007 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,046 | 0,009 |
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 ».