A scoping review of definitions and frameworks of intersectoral action

Dubois, Alejandra; St-Pierre, Louise; Veras, Mirella

doi:10.1590/1413-812320152010.01222014

Cited by 23 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, there are also champions in the field of social determinants who question whether screening is the most appropriate level of intervention. These experts in the field rightly point out that making an impact on social determinants requires broad intersectoral action and whole of government approaches [ 5 ]. The factors influencing people’s daily living conditions are generally political and structural [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening for social determinants of health in clinical care: moving from the margins to the mainstream

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundScreening for the social determinants of health in clinical practice is still widely debated.MethodsA scoping review was used to (1) explore the various screening tools that are available to identify social risk, (2) examine the impact that screening for social determinants has on health and social outcomes, and (3) identify factors that promote the uptake of screening in routine clinical care.ResultsOver the last two decades, a growing number of screening tools have been developed to help frontline health workers ask about the social determinants of health in clinical care. In addition to clinical practice guidelines that recommend screening for specific areas of social risk (e.g., violence in pregnancy), there is also a growing body of evidence exploring the use of screening or case finding for identifying multiple domains of social risk (e.g., poverty, food insecurity, violence, unemployment, and housing problems).ConclusionThere is increasing traction within the medical field for improving social history taking and integrating more formal screening for social determinants of health within clinical practice. There is also a growing number of high-quality evidence-based reviews that identify interventions that are effective in promoting health equity at the individual patient level, and at broader community and structural levels.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening for social determinants of health in clinical care: moving from the margins to the mainstream

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since the Ottawa Charter [24] introduced the importance of intersectoral collaboration for health and reduction of health inequalities, numerous studies have been published. A variety of terms and definitions have been used for the collaborative work in healthcare and public health: intersectoral action, intersectoral action for health [25], intersectoral cooperation [26], intersectoral collaboration [27,28], and intersectoral partnerships [29]. The terms are often being used interchangeably.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The terms are often being used interchangeably. In his review, Dubois et al searched for a consensual definition for the intersectoral work but could not find such a definition [25]. As a result, the authors constructed their own definition based on the structure: What: what is the action (process, collaboration, coordination)?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations for Effective Intersectoral Collaboration in Health Promotion Interventions: Results from Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS Work Package 5 Activities

Dale

Lemmens

Hendriksen

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The burden of chronic disease in Europe continues to grow. A major challenge facing national governments is how to tackle the risk factors of sedentary lifestyle, alcohol abuse, smoking, and unhealthy diet. These factors are complex and necessitate intersectoral collaboration to strengthen health promotion, counter-act the social determinants of health, and reduce the prevalence of chronic disease. European countries have diverse intersectoral collaboration to encourage health promotion activities. In the Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS success factors for intersectoral collaboration within and outside healthcare which strengthen health promotion activities were identified with a mixed method design via a survey of 22 project partners in 14 countries and 2 workshops. In six semi-structured interviews, the mechanisms underlying these success factors were examined. These mechanisms can be very context-specific but do give more insight into how they can be replicated. In this paper, 20 health promotion interventions from national programs in CHRODIS PLUS are explored. This includes community interventions, policy actions, integrated approaches, capacity building, and training activities. The interventions involved collaboration across three to more than six sectors. The conclusion is a set of seven recommendations that are considered to be essential for fostering intersectoral collaboration to improve health-promoting activities.

show abstract

“…Intra-sectoral actions are practices that arise from the need to improve the lives of people who are cared for by the health care network (2). Inter-sectoral actions aim to "achieve health outcomes in a more effective, efficient or sustainable way than the health sector could achieve by itself" (3). They seek to act within the social determinants of the health-disease and care process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of partnerships for actions intra-sectoral and inter-sectors for health in areas of high socio-environmental vulnerability in the city of São Paulo/Brazil: a mixed method study

Bezerra

Guerriero

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Since poverty areas are socioeconomic complex and limiting environments, there is a need to develop intra-sectoral and inter-sectoral actions in the health territory in order to achieve the economic and social well-being of people and society. This research aims to understand the relationship between inter-sectorial and inter-sectoral actions for health and socio-environmental groupings of the most vulnerable health territories in the city of São Paulo, identify which are the most frequent partners of these actions and how professionals experience these partnerships in their daily lives. Method: We adopted the mixed sequential and explanatory method. In the first phase, an online form was applied and identifies the Basic Health Units (BHU) that take place as intersectoral actions with more partners. In the second phase, we explored how the professionals consider the characteristics of the territory where they act to seek partnerships and how they carry out the actions. Results: Analysis of quantitative data indicated that: a) More than 98% of BHUs conduct intra- and inter-sectoral partnerships and b) there is no relationship between the indices of the most vulnerable groupings and the presence of intra- and inter-sectoral actions with statistical significance p <0.05. The content analysis of literal transcriptions pointed out that: intra- and inter-sectoral practices developed in the health territories were driven by the needs of the treatment of diseases or by the precarious conditions of life of individual or collectivities. However, in order to assist different types of violence, health professionals avoid seeking partnerships, including with the Tutelary Council and the Center for Human Rights, as they fear they will suffer reprisals by those who cause this violence. There was consistency between quantitative and qualitative data, except for partnership with education, other BHUs, environment, and the Tutelary Council. Conclusion: The construction of personalized partnerships for individual and collective health, in order to cope with social inequalities; of chronic diseases and by phases of the life cycle involved in socioeconomic fragilities that generate more poverty is part of the job from BHU’s professionals.

show abstract

A scoping review of definitions and frameworks of intersectoral action

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

Screening for social determinants of health in clinical care: moving from the margins to the mainstream

Screening for social determinants of health in clinical care: moving from the margins to the mainstream

Recommendations for Effective Intersectoral Collaboration in Health Promotion Interventions: Results from Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS Work Package 5 Activities

Analysis of partnerships for actions intra-sectoral and inter-sectors for health in areas of high socio-environmental vulnerability in the city of São Paulo/Brazil: a mixed method study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About