Advertisement

Harder Than Rocket Science? The Science of Designing and Implementing Strong Family-Friendly Policies

  • Patricia O’Campo
Part of the National Symposium on Family Issues book series (NSFI)

Abstract

Berkman and O’Donnell (Chap. 12) effectively argue that improvements in infant and child health will only come about with supportive family national ­policies. I pick up on two themes from the paper that identify potential gaps in the ­current literature. First, drawing from Berkman and O’Donnell’s conceptual ­framework, I review the “state of the evidence” for key macro-social drivers of ­pro-family policies. Despite widespread recognition that macro-social are critical drivers of population well-being, a very small proportion of our research incorporates consideration of these contextual factors due, in part, to an overreliance on studies at the individual level in public health. Second, I build on their call for more evaluation of pro-family policies. In particular, I examine whether the tools we have to undertake such evaluations are adequately developed. We must take advantage of and help to refine emerging evaluation methods that accommodate complex multilevel policies and programs if we are to identify and implement effective family-friendly policies.

Keywords

Health Inequity Family Policy Critical Ingredient Realist Review Social Epidemiology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Beckfield, J., & Krieger, N. (2009). Epi 1 demos 1 cracy: Linking political systems and priorities to the magnitude of health inequities—Evidence, gaps, and a research agenda. Epidemiologic Reviews, 31, 152–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonneux, L. (2007). From evidence based bioethics to evidence based social policies. European Journal of Epidemiology, 22, 483–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caughy, M. O., O’Campo, P. J., & Muntaner, C. (2003). When being alone might be better: Neighborhood poverty, social capital, and child mental health. Social Science and Medicine, 57(2), 227–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dunn, J., van der Meulen, E., Muntaner, C., & O’Campo, P. (2012). Improving health equity through theory-informed evaluations: A look at housing first strategies, cross sectoral health programs, and prostitution policy. Evaluation and Program Planning. Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.03.006.Google Scholar
  5. Fagen, M. C., Redman, S., Stacks, J., Barrett, V., Thullen, B., Altenor, S., et al. (2011). Developmenal evaluation: Building innovations in complex environments. Health Promotion Practice, 12(5), 645–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ferrarini, T., & Sjoberg, O. (2010). Social policy and health: Transition countries in a comparative perspective. International Journal of Social Welfare, 19, S60–S88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Given, L. M. (2008). Critical realism. In L. M. Given (Ed.), Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 167–170). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Kirst, M., & O’Campo, P. (2012). Realist review methods for complex health problems. In P. O’Campo & J. R. Dunn (Eds.), Rethinking social epidemiology: Towards a science of change (pp. 231–246). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Krieger, N. (2001). Theories for social epidemiology in the 21st century: An ecosocial perspective. International Journal of Epidemiology, 30(4), 668–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Leischow, S. J., Best, A., Trochim, W. M., Clark, P. I., Gallagher, R. S., Marcus, S. E., et al. (2008). Systems thinking to improve the public’s health. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(S2), S196–S203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Muntaner, C., Borrell, C., Ng, E., Chung, H., Espelt, A., Rodriguez-Sanz, M., et al. (2011). Politics, welfare regimes, and population health: Controversies and evidence. Sociology of Health and Illness, 33(6), 946–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Muntaner, C., Sridharan, S., Chung, H., Solar, O., Qunlan, M., Vergara, M., & EMCONET Network. (2010). The solution space: Developing research and policy agendas to eliminate employment-related health inequalities. International Journal of Health Services, 40(2), 309–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. National Institues of Health (2010). Effects of the social environment on health: Measurement, methods and mechanisms (R01) (RFA-DA-11-003). Retrieved from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-DA-11-003.html.
  14. Navarro, V., Muntaner, C., Borrell, C., Benach, J., Quiroga, A., Rodriquez-Sanz, M., et al. (2006). Politics and health outcomes. Lancet, 368(9540), 1033–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Navarro, V., & Shi, L. (2001). The political context of social inequalities and health. International Journal of Health Services, 31(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. O’Campo, P. (2003). Invited commentary: Advancing theory and methods for multilevel models of residential neighborhoods and health. American Journal of Epidemiology, 157(1), 9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Campo, P., Caughy, M., & Nettles, S. (2010). Partner abuse or violence, parenting and neighborhood influences on children’s behavioral problems? Social Science and Medicine, 70(9), 1404–1415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Campo, P., & Dunn, J. R. (2012a). Introduction. In P. O’Campo & J. R. Dunn (Eds.), Rethinking social epidemiology: Toward a science of change (pp. 1–22). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. O’Campo, P., & Dunn, J. R. (Eds.). (2012b). Rethinking social epidemiology: Towards a science of change. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. O’Campo, P., Kirst, M., Schaefer-McDaniel, N., Firestone, M., Scott, A., & McShane, K. (2009). Community-based services for homeless adults experiencing concurrent mental health and substance use disorders: A realist approach to synthesizing evidence. Journal of Urban Health, 86(6), 965–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. O’Campo, P., Kirst, M., Tsamis, C., Chambers, C., & Ahmad, F. (2011). Implementing successful intimate partner violence screening programs in health care settings: Evidence generated from a realist-informed systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 72(6), 855–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. O’Campo, P., Laupacis, A., Kirst, M., Shankardass, K., Lofters, A., Murphy, K., et al. (2009). Health in all policies: A scoping review. Canada: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.Google Scholar
  23. O’Campo, P., Shankardass, K., Murphy, K., Solar, O., & Bayoumi, A. (2011). A realist synthesis of initiation of Health in All Policies (HiAP): Intersectoral perspectives. Canada: Canadian Institutes for Health Research.Google Scholar
  24. O’Campo, P., Xue, X., Wang, M. C., & Caughy, M. (1997). Neighbourhood risk factors for low birthweight in Baltimore: A multilevel anlaysis. American Journal of Public Health, 87(1113–1118).Google Scholar
  25. Pawson, R. (2006). Evidence-based policy: A realist perspective. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G., & Walshe, K. (2004). Realist synthesis: an introduction. Manchester, UK: ESRC, Research Methods Programme.Google Scholar
  27. Petticrew, M., Whitehead, M., Macintyre, S., Graham, H., & Egan, M. (2004). Evidence for public health policy on inequalities: 1: The reality according to policymakers. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58, 811–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Putnam, S., & Galea, S. (2008). Epidemiology and the macrosocial determinants of health. Journal of Public Health Policy, 29(3), 275–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shankardass, K., O’Campo, P., Frieler, A., Murphy, K., Bayoumi, A., & Solar, O. (2011, October). Barriers and facilitators of implementing health in all policies: A multiple case study project. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Urban Health, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.Google Scholar
  30. Shankardass K., Solar O., Murphy K., Frieler A., Bobbili S., Bayoumi A., et al. (2010a, December). Health in all policies: Results of a realist-informed scoping review of the literature. Report to the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.Google Scholar
  31. Shankardass K., Solar O., Murphy K., Frieler A., Bobbili S., Bayoumi A., et al. (2010b, December). Health in all policies research library. Database provided to the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.Google Scholar
  32. Shankardass K., Solar O., Murphy K., Frieler A., Bobbili S., Bayoumi A., et al. (2010c, December). Health in all policies: 16 case descriptions. Report to the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.Google Scholar
  33. Shankardass, K., Solar, O., Murphy, K., Greaves, L., & O’Campo, P. (2012). A scoping review of intersectoral action for health equity involving governments. International Journal of Public Health, 57(1), 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Solar, O., & Irwin, A. (2007). A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health: Discussion paper for the World Health Organization’s Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  35. Solar O., & Shankardass K. (2011, February). Health in all policies conceptual framework addendum to the Report the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, Health in all policies: 16 case descriptions (2010).Google Scholar
  36. Solar, O., Valentinen, N., Albrech, D., & Rice, M. (2009, October). Moving forward to equity in health: What kind of intersectoral action is needed? An approach to an intersectoral typology. Paper presented at the 7th Global Conference For Health Promotion, Nairobi, Kenya.Google Scholar
  37. Ståhl, T., Wismar, M., Ollila, E., Lahtinen, E., & Leppo, K. (Eds.). (2006). Health in all policies: Prospects and potentials. Finland: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.Google Scholar
  38. Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Research on Inner City HealthUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations