Strengths and limitations of a tool for monitoring and evaluating First Peoples' health promotion from an ecological perspective
Loading...
Files in this item
Authors
Editor
Date
2015-12-08
Source Title
BMC Public Health
Publisher
BMC
Melbourne Authors
Affiliation
Melbourne School of Population and Global Health
Document Type
Journal Article
Subject Code
Citations
Rowley, K., Doyle, J., Johnston, L., Reilly, R., McCarthy, L., Marika, M., Riley, T., Atkinson, P., Firebrace, B., Calleja, J. & Cargo, M. (2015). Strengths and limitations of a tool for monitoring and evaluating First Peoples' health promotion from an ecological perspective. BMC Public Health, 15 (1), pp.1215-. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2550-3.
Access Status
Open Access
Access URL
Open Access URL
Open Access at PMC
Linked Resource URL
NHMRC Grant Code
ARC Grant Code
Description
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An ecological approach to health and health promotion targets individuals and the environmental determinants of their health as a means of more effectively influencing health outcomes. The approach has potential value as a means to more accurately capture the holistic nature of Australian First Peoples' health programs and the way in which they seek to influence environmental, including social, determinants of health. METHODS: We report several case studies of applying an ecological approach to health program evaluation using a tool developed for application to mainstream public health programs in North America - Richard's ecological coding procedure. RESULTS: We find the ecological approach in general, and the Richard procedure specifically, to have potential for broader use as an approach to reporting and evaluation of health promotion programs. However, our experience applying this tool in academic and community-based program evaluation contexts, conducted in collaboration with First Peoples of Australia, suggests that it would benefit from cultural adaptations that would bring the ecological coding procedure in greater alignment with the worldviews of First Peoples and better identify the aims and strategies of local health promotion programs. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing the cultural validity of the ecological coding procedure is necessary to adequately capture the underlying program activities of community-based health promotion programs designed to benefit First Peoples, and its collaborative implementation with First Peoples supports a human rights approach to health program evaluation.