Centre for Health Promotion Research (CHPR)

The Centre for Health Promotion Research (CHPR) coordinated the production of a special Supplement on population health intervention research that was published in October 2012 (Canadian Journal of Public Health, 2012, Vol. 103, No. 7, Suppl. 1).

The Supplement features nine research papers from various countries on a range of population health topics, such as immunization, oral health inequities, and prenatal nutrition, etc. The research papers were first reviewed for coverage of a range of topics by a panel of population health experts – led by Jim Frankish (CHPR) – and then through the standard peer-review process of the Canadian Journal of Public Health.

The seven members of the expert panel were: Jim Frankish; Hope Beanlands; Ted Bruce; Erica Di Ruggiero; Nazeem Muhajarine; Louise Potvin; and Robert VanWynsberghe.

Below is the original call for international papers (for historical purposes and as background information).

International Call for Contributions

The call is now closed (as of February 15, 2011). The Editorial Committee will be reviewing all the submissions.

The Centre for Population Health Promotion Research at the University of British Columbia is coordinating the production of a special Supplement for the Canadian Journal of Public Health on population health intervention research.

We encourage outlines of papers that report on research from diverse disciplines/sectors on a wide variety of policies and programs designed to improve health at the population level.

Outlines may be in English or French. Authors of selected outlines will be invited to submit full papers, which will be peer-reviewed by the journal. Approximately 15-20 papers will be included in the Supplement.

What is the Purpose of the Supplement?

The Supplement will be a collection of scientific evidence on and discussion of population health interventions that will have broad coverage with respect to discipline/sector (e.g., social sciences, economics, etc.), conditions of risk (determinants of health), and geography (Canadian and international papers).

Supplement Editorial Committee and the Review Process

The Supplement Editorial Committee is composed of members from the University of British Columbia, the National Collaborating Centre for Determinants of Health, the Population Health Intervention Research Network, the University of Saskatchewan, and Vancouver Coastal Health.

The Supplement Editorial Committee will use a two-stage review process to ensure relevance of papers to population health intervention research for the Supplement (see Guidelines below).

The Supplement Editorial Committee will first review all outlines for relevance to population health intervention research. Authors of accepted outlines will be invited to submit full papers for the Supplement. The Supplement Editorial Committee will secondly review the full papers to ensure that the invited full papers reflect their respective original outlines.  Authors are expected to follow the submitted outline and may be asked to revise their paper accordingly prior to submission for full editorial review by the journal.

A peer-review of the full papers will be conducted by the journal using its regular peer-review process. The Supplement Editorial Committee will not be conducting a peer-review of the full papers.

Guidelines for Outlines of Papers

What is Population Health Intervention Research?

For the purposes of this Supplement, ‘prototypical’ population health intervention research is defined by the following characteristics:

• It is research, which is systematic and disciplinary-informed data collection and analysis – within health or other disciplines

• About an intervention, which is a deliberate and coordinated set of actions – a policy or program

• To improve population health, which means reducing the risk conditions that generate health inequities and/or improving health at the population level.

Therefore, population health intervention research is viewed as a broad domain of interest that includes diverse research but also has boundaries. The following description and examples will help clarify an understanding of the notion of ‘prototypical’ population health intervention research.

With respect to research, there is no dominant or particular methodological or theoretical orientation. However, preference will be given to studies of interventions rather than studies that inform interventions. Studies of interventions focus on one or more evaluation approaches/methodologies: process evaluation; impact evaluation (short and mid-range); and outcome evaluation (longer-term).

With respect to interventions to improve population health, there also is no single or dominant strategy. A variety of policies and programs may be included. However, preference will be given to papers that report on policies and programs that aim to reduce the risk conditions that generate health inequities and/or act on the determinants of health to improve health at the population level. Lesser consideration will be given to papers regarding policies and programs that aim to change the behaviour of individual cases within the population or that aim to improve the health of disadvantaged groups without any reference to strategies to address the health gradient or determinants of health.

Examples – ‘Prototypical’ Population Health Intervention Research

• Outcome evaluation of a policy to ban trans fats.
The policy is an intervention and banning trans fats aims to reduce the incidence of coronary heart disease at the population level.

• Implementation evaluation of a nutrition education program in schools.
The program is an intervention that aims to reduce the incidence of malnutrition in all students (an age-related segment of the general population).

• A health impact assessment of a social policy (e.g., seat belt use).
The social policy is an intervention that is aimed at the population level.

• An employment training program for vulnerable groups.
The program is an intervention that addresses a risk condition (lack of employability) that leads to poorer health in vulnerable groups (health inequity).

Examples – Not ‘Prototypical’ Population Health Intervention Research

• Asset mapping or needs assessment.
This information may inform interventions, but it is not an intervention – there is no policy or program.

• Outcome evaluation of surgery treatment.
This is clinical epidemiology research on an intervention, but the intervention does not address underlying risk conditions that generate health inequities nor does it address the determinants of health to improve outcomes at the population level.

• Quality assessment of care arrangements.
This is health services research that does not address health inequities or the determinants of health to improve health at the population level.

Example – Borderline ‘Prototypical’ Population Health Intervention Research

• A study on the effect of naturally-occurring housing arrangements on health.
Although housing arrangement may be considered an intervention, the housing arrangements in this study were naturally-occurring and not specifically designed or modified to be the object of study. This study is etiological research that explores a potential factor on health that could be addressed through future, deliberate interventions to improve health at the population level.

Criteria for Review of Outlines

Each submitted outline will be reviewed first for its relevance to population health intervention research based on the three characteristics of ‘prototypical’ population health intervention research described above – research, intervention, and reducing health inequities and/or improving health at the population level.

Outlines that meet the criteria during the first stage (i.e., outlines that reflect population health intervention research) will then proceed to a second-stage review relative to other submitted outlines based on four additional criteria to ensure broad coverage of population health intervention research. The four additional criteria are not mutually exclusive.

1. Discipline/sector
Does the outline cover disciplines and/or sectors that are not being sufficiently covered by other outlines? Outlines of projects that include inter-sectoral collaboration will be given preference.

2. Conditions of risk
Does the outline cover a condition of risk that is not being sufficiently covered by other outlines? Conditions of risk relate to the determinants of health (income and social status, social support networks, education and literacy, employment/working conditions, social environments, physical environments, personal health practices and coping skills, healthy child development, biology and genetic endowment, health services, gender, culture).

3. Geography
Does the outline cover a location that is not being sufficiently covered by other outlines? Examples of geography include country, province, region, and city.

4. Community engagement
Outlines of projects that engage the relevant community will be given preference.

How to Submit an Outline

The call is now closed (as of February 15, 2011).

If you have any questions, please contact: Brenda Kwan.