Cargando…

Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods

Acceptability of and public support for prevention are an important part of facilitating policy implementation. This review aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the methods and study designs used to measure and understand public opinion, community attitudes and acceptability of strategies to p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Howse, Eloise, Cullerton, Katherine, Grunseit, Anne, Bohn-Goldbaum, Erika, Bauman, Adrian, Freeman, Becky
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8895540/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35246170
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-022-00829-y
_version_ 1784662947742613504
author Howse, Eloise
Cullerton, Katherine
Grunseit, Anne
Bohn-Goldbaum, Erika
Bauman, Adrian
Freeman, Becky
author_facet Howse, Eloise
Cullerton, Katherine
Grunseit, Anne
Bohn-Goldbaum, Erika
Bauman, Adrian
Freeman, Becky
author_sort Howse, Eloise
collection PubMed
description Acceptability of and public support for prevention are an important part of facilitating policy implementation. This review aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the methods and study designs used to measure and understand public opinion, community attitudes and acceptability of strategies to prevent chronic noncommunicable disease (NCDs) in order to allow for examination of imbalances in methodological approaches and gaps in content areas. We searched four scientific databases (CINAHL, Embase, Ovid/MEDLINE and Scopus) for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between January 2011 and March 2020 in high-income, democratic countries across North America, Europe and the Asia–Pacific region. Studies were included if they focused on opinions, attitudes and acceptability of primary prevention strategies and interventions addressing the key NCD risk factors of alcohol use, unhealthy diet, overweight/obesity, tobacco use and smoking, and physical inactivity. A total of 293 studies were included. Two thirds of studies (n = 194, 66%) used quantitative methods such as cross-sectional studies involving surveys of representative (n = 129, 44%) or convenience (n = 42, 14%) samples. A smaller number of studies used qualitative methods (n = 60, 20%) such as focus groups (n = 21, 7%) and interviews (n = 21, 7%). Thirty-nine studies (13%) used mixed methods such as content analysis of news media (n = 17, 6%). Tobacco control remains the dominant topic of public opinion literature about prevention (n = 124, 42%). Few studies looked solely at physical inactivity (n = 17, 6%). The results of this review suggest that public opinion and acceptability of prevention in the peer-reviewed literature is investigated primarily through cross-sectional surveys. Qualitative and mixed methods may provide more nuanced insights which can be used to facilitate policy implementation of more upstream strategies and policies to prevent NCDs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12961-022-00829-y.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8895540
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88955402022-03-10 Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods Howse, Eloise Cullerton, Katherine Grunseit, Anne Bohn-Goldbaum, Erika Bauman, Adrian Freeman, Becky Health Res Policy Syst Review Acceptability of and public support for prevention are an important part of facilitating policy implementation. This review aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the methods and study designs used to measure and understand public opinion, community attitudes and acceptability of strategies to prevent chronic noncommunicable disease (NCDs) in order to allow for examination of imbalances in methodological approaches and gaps in content areas. We searched four scientific databases (CINAHL, Embase, Ovid/MEDLINE and Scopus) for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between January 2011 and March 2020 in high-income, democratic countries across North America, Europe and the Asia–Pacific region. Studies were included if they focused on opinions, attitudes and acceptability of primary prevention strategies and interventions addressing the key NCD risk factors of alcohol use, unhealthy diet, overweight/obesity, tobacco use and smoking, and physical inactivity. A total of 293 studies were included. Two thirds of studies (n = 194, 66%) used quantitative methods such as cross-sectional studies involving surveys of representative (n = 129, 44%) or convenience (n = 42, 14%) samples. A smaller number of studies used qualitative methods (n = 60, 20%) such as focus groups (n = 21, 7%) and interviews (n = 21, 7%). Thirty-nine studies (13%) used mixed methods such as content analysis of news media (n = 17, 6%). Tobacco control remains the dominant topic of public opinion literature about prevention (n = 124, 42%). Few studies looked solely at physical inactivity (n = 17, 6%). The results of this review suggest that public opinion and acceptability of prevention in the peer-reviewed literature is investigated primarily through cross-sectional surveys. Qualitative and mixed methods may provide more nuanced insights which can be used to facilitate policy implementation of more upstream strategies and policies to prevent NCDs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12961-022-00829-y. BioMed Central 2022-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8895540/ /pubmed/35246170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-022-00829-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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 Review
Howse, Eloise
Cullerton, Katherine
Grunseit, Anne
Bohn-Goldbaum, Erika
Bauman, Adrian
Freeman, Becky
Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods
title Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods
title_full Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods
title_fullStr Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods
title_full_unstemmed Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods
title_short Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods
title_sort measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8895540/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35246170
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-022-00829-y
work_keys_str_mv AT howseeloise measuringpublicopinionandacceptabilityofpreventionpoliciesanintegrativereviewandnarrativesynthesisofmethods
AT cullertonkatherine measuringpublicopinionandacceptabilityofpreventionpoliciesanintegrativereviewandnarrativesynthesisofmethods
AT grunseitanne measuringpublicopinionandacceptabilityofpreventionpoliciesanintegrativereviewandnarrativesynthesisofmethods
AT bohngoldbaumerika measuringpublicopinionandacceptabilityofpreventionpoliciesanintegrativereviewandnarrativesynthesisofmethods
AT baumanadrian measuringpublicopinionandacceptabilityofpreventionpoliciesanintegrativereviewandnarrativesynthesisofmethods
AT freemanbecky measuringpublicopinionandacceptabilityofpreventionpoliciesanintegrativereviewandnarrativesynthesisofmethods