Long-standing commentaries about men’s reticence for accessing clinical medical services, along with the more recent recognition of men’s health inequities, has driven work in community-based men’s health promotion. Indeed, the 2000s have seen rapid growth in community-based programs targeting men, and across this expanse of innovative work, experiential and empirical insights afford some important lessons learnt, and caveats to guide existing and future efforts. The current article offers eight lessons learnt regarding the design, content, recruitment, delivery, evaluation and scaling of community-based men’s health promotion programs. Design lessons include the need to address social determinants of health and men’s health inequities, build activity-based programming, garner men’s permission and affirmation to shift masculine norms, and integrate content to advance men’s health literacy. Also detailed are lessons learnt about men-friendly spaces, recruitment and retention strategies, the need to incrementally execute program evaluations, and the limits for program sustainability and scaling. Drawing from diverse community-based programs to illustrate the lessons learnt, caveats are also detailed to contextualize and caution some aspects of the lessons that are shared. The express aim of discussing lessons learnt and their caveats, reflected in the purpose of the current article, is to guide existing and future work in the ever growing field of community-based men’s health promotion.
Social isolation has featured as a significant and oftentimes all-encompassing risk factor for male suicide, yet, as an explanatory mechanism, it has not been unpacked in terms of what it constitutes in everyday life. The current photovoice study explores the various dimensions of the lived experience of social isolation, as embedded in accounts of suicidality drawn from 35 Canadian men. Study participants narrated the following factors as underpinning their social isolation: (a) family dysfunction and estrangement, (b) marginality and feeling like misfits at school and work, (c) alienation and provisional acceptance of health care, (d) ineffectual and self-harming management, (e) intrusive dislocating thoughts, and (f) society's burdensome and immoral subjects. These interwoven but discrete spheres provide a means for understanding the phenomenology of social isolation and a basis for melding ideas about connectedness, relationality, personal history, and care, along with strategies to support and reduce men's suicidality.
Although men’s health promotion efforts have attracted programmatic and evaluative research, conspicuously absent are gendered insights to men’s health literacy. The current scoping review article shares the findings drawn from 12 published articles addressing men’s health literacy in a range of health and illness contexts. Evident was consensus that approaches tailored to men’s everyday language and delivered in familiar community-based spaces were central to advancing men’s health literacy, and, by extension, the effectiveness of men’s health promotion programs. However, most men’s health literacy studies focussed on medical knowledge of disease contexts including prostate and colon cancers, while diversity was evident regards conceptual frameworks and/or methods and measures for evaluating men’s health literacy. Despite evidence that low levels of health literacy fuel stigma and men’s reticence for health help-seeking, and that tailoring programs to health literacy levels is requisite to effective men’s health promotion efforts, the field of men’s health literacy remains underdeveloped. Based on the scoping review findings, recommendations for future research include integrating men’s health literacy research as a needs analysis to more effectively design and evaluate targeted men’s health promotion programs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.