↓ Skip to main content

Facilitators for the development and implementation of health promoting policy and programs – a scoping review at the local community level

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Facilitators for the development and implementation of health promoting policy and programs – a scoping review at the local community level
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-2811-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Weiss, Monica Lillefjell, Eva Magnus

Abstract

Health promotion, with a focus on multidimensional upstream factors and an ecological, life-course approach, is establishing itself as the guiding philosophy for addressing public health. Action at the political and programmatic level on the Social Determinants of Health has proven effective for promoting and building public health at all levels but has been particularly evident at the national and international levels - due in large part to available documents and guidelines. Although research and experience establish that health promotion is most effective when settings-based, the development of health promoting policies and programs at the local level is still difficult. This study intended to investigate available knowledge on the development and implementation of health promoting policies and programs at the local level and identify factors most important for facilitating capacity building and outcome achievement. We used a scoping review in order to review the current literature on local policy development and program implementation. Keywords were chosen based on results of a previous literature review. A total of 53 articles were divided into two categories: policy and implementation. Critical analysis was conducted for each article and a summary assembled. Data was charted with specific focus on the aims of the study, data acquisition, key theories/concepts/frameworks used, outcome measures, results, and conclusions. The articles included in this study primarily focused on discussing factors that facilitate the development of health promoting policy and the implementation of health promotion programs. Most significant facilitators included: collaborative decision-making, agreement of objectives and goals, local planning and action, effective leadership, building and maintaining trust, availability of resources, a dynamic approach, a realistic time-frame, and trained and knowledgeable staff. Within each of these important facilitating factors, various elements supporting implementation were discussed and highlighted in this study. Our results indicate that clear and consistent facilitators exist for supporting health promoting policy development and program implementation at the local level. These results offer a starting point for local action on the Social Determinants of Health and have the potential to contribute to the development of a framework for improving action at the local level.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Unknown 157 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 16%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 40 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 33 21%
Social Sciences 28 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 48 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2021.
All research outputs
#7,544,407
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,965
of 14,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,215
of 401,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#119
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 401,665 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.