Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32579122›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2020

Intersectoral Cooperation in 12 European Case Studies Aiming for Better Health, Environmental Sustainability, and Health Equity: Protocol for a Qualitative Evaluation.

Nina van der Vliet, Lea Den Broeder, María Romeo-Velilla, Hanneke Kruize, Brigit Staatsen, Jantine Schuit

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nina van der VlietNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8990-0907
Lea Den BroederNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1927-4530
María Romeo-VelillaEuroHealthNet, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4256-9222
Hanneke KruizeNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1366-4677
Brigit StaatsenNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7927-1983
Jantine SchuitTilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7499-1391

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe INHERIT (INtersectoral Health and Environment Research for InnovaTion) project has evaluated intersectoral cooperation (IC) in 12 European case studies attempting to promote health, environmental sustainability, and equity through behavior and lifestyle changes. These factors are the concerns of multiple sectors of government and society. Cooperation of health and environmental sectors with other sectors is needed to enable effective action. IC is thus essential to promote a triple win of health, sustainability, and equity.

objectiveThis paper describes the design of a qualitative study to gain insights into successful organization of IC, facilitators and barriers, and how future steps can be taken to improve IC in the evaluated case studies.

methodsEach case study was assessed qualitatively through a focus group. A total of 12 focus groups in 10 different European countries with stakeholders, implementers, policymakers, and/or citizens were held between October 2018 and March 2019. Five to eight participants attended each focus group. The focus group method was based on appreciative inquiry, which is an asset-based approach focusing on what works well, why it is working well, and how to strengthen assets in the future. A stepped approach was used, with central coordination and analysis, and local implementation and reporting. Local teams were trained to apply a common protocol using a webinar and handbook on organizing, conducting, and reporting focus groups. Data were gathered in each country in the local language. Translated data were analyzed centrally using deductive thematic analysis, with consideration of further emerging themes. Analyses involved the capability, opportunity, motivation-behavior (COM-b) system to categorize facilitators and barriers into capability, motivation, or opportunity-related themes, as these factors influence the behaviors of individuals and groups. Web-based review sessions with representatives from all local research teams were held to check data analysis results and evaluate the stepped approach.

resultsData collection has been completed. A total of 76 individuals participated in 12 focus groups. In December 2019, data analysis was nearly complete, and the results are expected to be published in fall 2020.

conclusionsThis study proposes a stepped approach that allows cross-country focus group research using a strict protocol while dealing with language and cultural differences. The study generates insights into IC processes and facilitators in different countries and case studies to filter out which facilitators are essential to include. Simultaneously, the approach can strengthen cooperation among stakeholders by looking at future cooperation possibilities. By providing knowledge on how to plan for, improve, and sustain IC successfully to deal with today's multisectoral challenges, this study can contribute to better intersectoral action for the triple win of better health, sustainability, and equity. This protocol can serve as a tool for other researchers who plan to conduct cross-country qualitative research. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/17323.

Indexed as

environmental sustainabilityequityfocus groupshealthintersectoral cooperationprotocol

Identifiers

PMID32579122
PMCPMC7381080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.