Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWang, J
dc.contributor.authorHu, YJ
dc.contributor.authorClifford, S
dc.contributor.authorGoldfeld, S
dc.contributor.authorWake, M
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-19T04:13:36Z
dc.date.available2021-01-19T04:13:36Z
dc.date.issued2021-01-18
dc.identifierpii: S2040174420001245
dc.identifier.citationWang, J., Hu, Y. J., Clifford, S., Goldfeld, S. & Wake, M. (2021). Selecting life course frameworks to guide and communicate large new cohort studies: Generation Victoria (GenV) case study. Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease, pp.1-20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2040174420001245.
dc.identifier.issn2040-1744
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/258750
dc.description.abstractWhile birth cohorts are shaped by underpinning life course frameworks, few if any report how they select them. This review aimed to (1) summarise publicly available frameworks relevant to planning and communicating large new early-life cohorts and (2) help select frameworks to guide and communicate Generation Victoria (GenV), a whole-of-state birth and parent cohort in planning in the state of Victoria, Australia. We identified potential frameworks from prior knowledge, networks and a pragmatic literature search in 2019. We considered for inclusion only frameworks with an existing visual graphic. We summarised each framework's concept, then judged it on a seven-item matrix (Scope, Dimensions, Outcomes, Life course, Mechanisms, Multi-age, and Visual Clarity) to be of high, intermediate or low relevance to GenV. We presented and evaluated 14 life course frameworks across research and policy. Two, nine and three frameworks, respectively, were ranked as high, intermediate and low relevance to GenV, although none totally communicated its scope and intent. Shonkoff's biodevelopmental framework was selected as GenV's primary framework, adapted to include ongoing feedback loops through the life course and influence of an individual's outcomes on the next generation. Because conceptual simplicity precluded the primary framework from capturing the wide range of relevant exposures, we selected the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare's person-centred model as a secondary framework. This summary of existing life course frameworks may prove helpful to other cohorts in planning. Our transparent process and focus on visual communication are already assisting in explaining and selecting measures for GenV. The feasibility, comprehension and validity of these frameworks could be further tested at implementation.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherCambridge University Press (CUP)
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.titleSelecting life course frameworks to guide and communicate large new cohort studies: Generation Victoria (GenV) case study
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S2040174420001245
melbourne.affiliation.departmentPaediatrics (RCH)
melbourne.source.titleJournal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease
melbourne.source.pages1-20
dc.rights.licenseCC BY
melbourne.elementsid1489612
melbourne.contributor.authorGoldfeld, Sharon
melbourne.contributor.authorWake, Melissa
dc.identifier.eissn2040-1752
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record