ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2024
Capabilities, opportunities, motivations, and practices of different sector professionals working on community environments to improve health.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Organizational Case Study of Mental Models among Health System Leaders during Early-Stage Implementation of a Population Health Approach.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWith rising healthcare costs in Canada from chronic conditions, individual behaviour change interventions in the clinical settings need to be complemented by a determinants of health approach, where multi-sector professionals assist in the creation of healthier community environments. This study sought to gain insights into capabilities, opportunities, motivations, and behaviours (COM-B) of Canadian multi-sector professionals for working together to improve built environments (BE) for health.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted with 61 multi-sector professionals. A 49-item questionnaire measuring constructs of COM-B for healthy BE practices was administered.
resultsPublic health (PH) professionals were more motivated by personal interest/values in healthy BE and the presence of scientific evidence on BE design health impacts as compared with planning and policy/program development (PPD) professionals. Planning professionals were more likely to be motivated by healthy BE legislation/regulations/codes than PPD professionals. The practice of taking responsibility for the inclusion of healthy features into BE designs was reported more often by planning and other professionals compared to PH professionals. Results trended towards significance for opportunities as a predictor of healthy BE practices among all professionals.
conclusionThough motivators vary among different sector professionals, opportunities may be the most important driver of healthy BE practices and potentially a target to improve multi-sector professional practices in Canada. Future research should confirm findings of this first study of professional practice drivers guided by a theoretical behaviour change framework.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.