No abstract

Community interventions are complex social processes that need to move beyond single interventions and outcomes at individual levels of short-term change. A scientific paradigm is emerging that supports collaborative, multilevel, culturally situated community interventions aimed at creating sustainable community-level impact. This paradigm is rooted in a deep history of ecological and collaborative thinking across public health, psychology, anthropology, and other fields of social science. The new paradigm makes a number of primary assertions that affect conceptualization of health issues, intervention design, and intervention evaluation. To elaborate the paradigm and advance the science of community intervention, we offer suggestions for promoting a scientific agenda, developing collaborations among professionals and communities, and examining the culture of science.

Realist review has increased in popularity as a methodology for complex intervention assessment. Our experience suggests that the process of designing a realist review requires its customization to areas under investigation. To elaborate on this idea, we first describe the logic underpinning realist review and then present critical reflections on our application experience, organized in seven areas. These are the following: (1) the challenge of identifying middle range theory; (2) addressing heterogeneity and lack of conceptual clarity; (3) the challenge of appraising the quality of complex evidence; (4) the relevance of capturing unintended outcomes; (5) understanding the process of context, mechanism, and outcome (CMO) configuring; (6) incorporating middle-range theory in the CMO configuration process; and (7) using middle range theory to advance the conceptualization of outcomes - both visible and seemingly 'hidden'. One conclusion from our experience is that the degree of heterogeneity of the evidence base will determine whether theory can drive the development of review protocols from the outset, or will follow only after an intense period of data immersion. We hope that presenting a critical reflection on customizing realist review will convey how the methodology can be tailored to the often complex and idiosyncratic features of health research, leading to innovative evidence syntheses.

No abstract

The relationships among social structure, stress, social support, life-style health behavior, and health status are explored in this multivariate analysis of data from the National Survey of Personal Health Practices and Consequences. Path analyses showed social structural factors to influence life-style practices both directly and indirectly through social network and negative life events. For women, social network and life events had direct relationships to health related life-style practices, while age and income acted both directly and indirectly through social network and, for income, through life events. Education was also directly related to life-style. For men, social network and education had the only direct effects on health practices, and age and income had indirect effects through network. We then examined the relative contributions of the social network index elements, life events, and demographic variables to each of the life-style practices. These analyses confirmed the importance of gender, education, age, and income to predicting life-style behaviors. Negative life events were associated with smoking for both men and women, sleep for women only, and physical activity and alcohol use for men, which suggests sex-specific norms for coping with stress. For both sexes, church attendance and marriage were associated with favorable smoking and alcoholic use, implicating cognitive social support or social control as a mediator of health promotion. Finally, analyses for each gender using health status as the outcome variable indicated that age, income, education, and life events affected health directly, while the effects of church attendance and marriage were likely mediated through smoking and alcohol behaviors.