Cargando…
Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol
BACKGROUND: Large health inequalities exist in the Netherlands among individuals with a high compared to a low socioeconomic position. Worksite health promotion interventions are considered promising to reduce these inequalities, however, current interventions seem not to have the desired effects. T...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068920/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-5020-2 |
_version_ | 1783505671744913408 |
---|---|
author | van Heijster, Hanneke van Berkel, Jantien Abma, Tineke Boot, Cécile R. L. de Vet, Emely |
author_facet | van Heijster, Hanneke van Berkel, Jantien Abma, Tineke Boot, Cécile R. L. de Vet, Emely |
author_sort | van Heijster, Hanneke |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Large health inequalities exist in the Netherlands among individuals with a high compared to a low socioeconomic position. Worksite health promotion interventions are considered promising to reduce these inequalities, however, current interventions seem not to have the desired effects. This study proposes ‘moral case deliberation’, a form of stakeholder dialogue on moral dilemmas, as an integrated and inclusive intervention for worksite health promotion. This intervention takes into account three factors that are considered possible underlying causes of low effectiveness of current interventions, namely the lack of deliberate attention to: 1) the diverging values and interests of stakeholders in worksite health promotion, 2) the ethical issues of worksite health promotion, and 3) the connection with the lived experience (lifeworld) of lower SEP employees. Moral case deliberation will help to gain insight in the conflicting values in worksite health promotion, which contributes to the development of a vision for worksite health promotion that is supported by all parties. METHODS: The intervention will be evaluated through Responsive Evaluation, a form of participatory research. Key to Responsive Evaluation is that stakeholders are consulted to determine relevant changes as a result of the intervention. The intervention will be evaluated yearly at both fixed moments (baseline and annual evaluation(s)) and continuously. Mixed methods will be used, including interviews, participatory observations, analyses of HRM-data and short questionnaires. In addition, the intervention will be evaluated economically, on both monetary and non-monetary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This protocol proposes an innovative intervention and a novel participatory evaluation in the context of worksite health promotion. The study aims to gain understanding in how dialogue on moral dilemmas on health and health promotion can contribute to heightened personal and mutual understanding among stakeholders and practice improvements in the work context. By evaluating the intervention in more than one setting, findings of this study will provide knowledge about how MCD can be adapted to specific work settings and what changes it may lead to in these settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NRT): NL8051. Registration date: 28/09/2019, retrospectively registered. https://www.trialregister.nl/ |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7068920 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70689202020-03-18 Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol van Heijster, Hanneke van Berkel, Jantien Abma, Tineke Boot, Cécile R. L. de Vet, Emely BMC Health Serv Res Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Large health inequalities exist in the Netherlands among individuals with a high compared to a low socioeconomic position. Worksite health promotion interventions are considered promising to reduce these inequalities, however, current interventions seem not to have the desired effects. This study proposes ‘moral case deliberation’, a form of stakeholder dialogue on moral dilemmas, as an integrated and inclusive intervention for worksite health promotion. This intervention takes into account three factors that are considered possible underlying causes of low effectiveness of current interventions, namely the lack of deliberate attention to: 1) the diverging values and interests of stakeholders in worksite health promotion, 2) the ethical issues of worksite health promotion, and 3) the connection with the lived experience (lifeworld) of lower SEP employees. Moral case deliberation will help to gain insight in the conflicting values in worksite health promotion, which contributes to the development of a vision for worksite health promotion that is supported by all parties. METHODS: The intervention will be evaluated through Responsive Evaluation, a form of participatory research. Key to Responsive Evaluation is that stakeholders are consulted to determine relevant changes as a result of the intervention. The intervention will be evaluated yearly at both fixed moments (baseline and annual evaluation(s)) and continuously. Mixed methods will be used, including interviews, participatory observations, analyses of HRM-data and short questionnaires. In addition, the intervention will be evaluated economically, on both monetary and non-monetary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This protocol proposes an innovative intervention and a novel participatory evaluation in the context of worksite health promotion. The study aims to gain understanding in how dialogue on moral dilemmas on health and health promotion can contribute to heightened personal and mutual understanding among stakeholders and practice improvements in the work context. By evaluating the intervention in more than one setting, findings of this study will provide knowledge about how MCD can be adapted to specific work settings and what changes it may lead to in these settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NRT): NL8051. Registration date: 28/09/2019, retrospectively registered. https://www.trialregister.nl/ BioMed Central 2020-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7068920/ /pubmed/32164716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-5020-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol van Heijster, Hanneke van Berkel, Jantien Abma, Tineke Boot, Cécile R. L. de Vet, Emely Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol |
title | Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol |
title_full | Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol |
title_fullStr | Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol |
title_short | Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol |
title_sort | responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of sep related health inequalities: a study protocol |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068920/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-5020-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanheijsterhanneke responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol AT vanberkeljantien responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol AT abmatineke responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol AT bootcecilerl responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol AT devetemely responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol |