Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33256728›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

The "Healthy Akame!" community - government - university collaboration for health: a community-based participatory mixed-method approach to address health issue in rural Japan.

Marinda Asiah Nuril Haya, Shuhei Ichikawa, Yukino Shibagaki, Akame Machijuu Genki Project Community Advisory Board, Hideki Wakabayashi, Yousuke Takemura

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Marinda Asiah Nuril HayaDepartment of Family Medicine, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Edobashi 2-174, Tsu city, Mie prefecture, Japan. real.haya@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0215-3807
Shuhei IchikawaFaculty of Clinical Medicine, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Edobashi 2-174, Tsu city, Mie prefecture, Japan.
Yukino ShibagakiCommunity Integrated Support Center, Department of Welfare and Children Nabari City Office, Konodai 1-1, Nabari city, Mie prefecture, Japan.
Akame Machijuu Genki Project Community Advisory Board
Hideki WakabayashiDepartment of Community Medicine Kameyama, Mie University School of Medicine, Edobashi 2-174, Tsu city, Mie prefecture, Japan.
Yousuke TakemuraDepartment of Family Medicine, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Yushima 1-5-45, Bunkyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Mie University · JPTokyo Medical and Dental University · JP

Funding

Mie University Support Grant for Community Contribution ProjectNabari City Research Grant for Mie University School of Medicine, Department of Community Medicine Nabari
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough Japan has a decentralized public health system, local governments have considered expert opinions over those of the community in decisions about public health programs. Differences in communities' interests may create gaps between health program objectives and implementation. We hypothesized that community-based participatory research (CBPR), which involves the community at every step, promotes effective program implementation and community empowerment. This study addressed the first step of CBPR, assessing community needs and developing tailored health program for a rural community in Japan.

methodsIn this sequential exploratory mixed-method study (qualitative followed by quantitative), we first formed a community advisory board (CAB) representing community organizations, city officials, and university researchers. The CAB conducted group discussions with community residents to identify the community's health issues and strengths. These group discussions were analyzed using thematic analysis, and the results were used to develop a questionnaire, which was subsequently sent to all households in the community to obtain priority scores for health issues and proposed action and to assess willingness to participate in community health program. The CAB then designed a program using the overall study results.

resultsTen group discussions with 68 participants identified the following health issues: 1) diseases; 2) unhealthy behaviors; and 3) unsupportive environment. Nature, vacant lots, and local farms were considered local strengths. Of a total of 1470 households in the community, questionnaires were collected from 773 households. Cancer, lifestyle-related diseases, and cerebrovascular diseases were ranked as the most important health problems. Improving services and access to medical checkups, use of public space for exercise, local farming, and collaboration with the community health office were considered necessary to address these health problems. Considering feasibility and the availability of resources in the community, the CAB decided to focus on lifestyle-related diseases and designed activities centered on health awareness, nutrition, and exercise. These activities drew on community's strengths and were adapted to Japanese culture.

conclusionsThe community's priority health problem was closely related to the epidemiology of diseases. The CBPR approach was useful for identifying community's needs and for designing a unique community health program that made use of local strengths.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationGovernmentRural PopulationUniversitiesCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchHumansIntersectoral CollaborationJapanCommunity-based participatory researchHealth needs assessmentHealth promotionMixed-methodProgram developmentRural health

Identifiers

PMID33256728
PMCPMC7702688
OpenAlexW3107377405

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.