IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i13p7947-d850975.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of Public Health Core Outcome Sets for Systems-Wide Promotion of Early Life Health and Wellbeing

Author

Listed:
  • Liina Mansukoski

    (Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK)

  • Alexandra Albert

    (Thomas Coram Research Unit, University College London (UCL), London WC1H 0AL, UK)

  • Yassaman Vafai

    (Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK
    Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK)

  • Chris Cartwright

    (Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK)

  • Aamnah Rahman

    (Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK)

  • Jessica Sheringham

    (Department of Applied Health Research, University College London (UCL), London WC1E 6BT, UK)

  • Bridget Lockyer

    (Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK)

  • Tiffany C. Yang

    (Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK)

  • Philip Garnett

    (School of Management, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK)

  • Maria Bryant

    (Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK
    Hull York Medical School, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK)

Abstract

We aimed to develop a core outcome set (COS) for systems-wide public health interventions seeking to promote early life health and wellbeing. Research was embedded within the existing systems-based intervention research programme ‘ActEarly’, located in two different areas with high rates of child poverty, Bradford (West Yorkshire) and the Borough of Tower Hamlets (London). 168 potential outcomes were derived from five local government outcome frameworks, a community-led survey and an ActEarly consortium workshop. Two rounds of a Delphi study (Round 1: 37 participants; Round 2: 56 participants) reduced the number of outcomes to 64. 199 members of the community then took part in consultations across ActEarly sites, resulting in a final COS for systems-based public health interventions of 40 outcomes. These were grouped into the domains of: Development & education (N = 6); Physical health & health behaviors (N = 6); Mental health (N = 5); Social environment (N = 4); Physical environment (N = 7); and Poverty & inequality (N = 7). This process has led to a COS with outcomes prioritized from the perspectives of local communities. It provides the means to increase standardization and guide the selection of outcome measures for systems-based evaluation of public health programmes and supports evaluation of individual interventions within system change approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Liina Mansukoski & Alexandra Albert & Yassaman Vafai & Chris Cartwright & Aamnah Rahman & Jessica Sheringham & Bridget Lockyer & Tiffany C. Yang & Philip Garnett & Maria Bryant, 2022. "Development of Public Health Core Outcome Sets for Systems-Wide Promotion of Early Life Health and Wellbeing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-15, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:13:p:7947-:d:850975
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/13/7947/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/13/7947/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meijering, J.V. & Kampen, J.K. & Tobi, H., 2013. "Quantifying the development of agreement among experts in Delphi studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1607-1614.
    2. Ieva Skarda & Miqdad Asaria & Richard Cookson, 2021. "LifeSim: A Lifecourse Dynamic Microsimulation Model of the Millennium Birth Cohort in England," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 14(1), pages 2-42.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kopasker, Daniel & Bronka, Patryk & Thomson, Rachel M. & Khodygo, Vladimir & Kromydas, Theocharis & Meier, Petra & Heppenstall, Alison & Bambra, Clare & Lomax, Nik & Craig, Peter & Richiardi, Matteo &, 2024. "Evaluating the influence of taxation and social security policies on psychological distress: A microsimulation study of the UK during the COVID-19 economic crisis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 351(C).
    2. Christoph Markmann & Alexander Spickermann & Heiko A. von der Gracht & Alexander Brem, 2021. "Improving the question formulation in Delphi‐like surveys: Analysis of the effects of abstract language and amount of information on response behavior," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), March.
    3. Anna-Maria Fontrier & Bregtje Kamphuis & Panos Kanavos, 2024. "How can health technology assessment be improved to optimise access to medicines? Results from a Delphi study in Europe," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(6), pages 935-950, August.
    4. Meijering, Jurian Vincent & Tobi, Hilde, 2018. "The effects of feeding back experts’ own initial ratings in Delphi studies: A randomized trial," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 216-224.
    5. Skarda, Ieva & Asaria, Miqdad & Cookson, Richard, 2022. "Evaluating childhood policy impacts on lifetime health, wellbeing and inequality: Lifecourse distributional economic evaluation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 302(C).
    6. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.
    7. Esmaelian, Majid & Tavana, Madjid & Di Caprio, Debora & Ansari, Reza, 2017. "A multiple correspondence analysis model for evaluating technology foresight methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 188-205.
    8. Steiner, Alexandre Arns & Franco, David Gabriel de Barros & Nara, Elpídio Oscar Benitez & Steiner, Maria Teresinha Arns, 2023. "Creating technical criteria for the hierarchization of public works: Case study in Paraná state, Brazil," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    9. Barrios, Maite & Guilera, Georgina & Nuño, Laura & Gómez-Benito, Juana, 2021. "Consensus in the delphi method: What makes a decision change?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    10. Mauksch, Stefanie & von der Gracht, Heiko A. & Gordon, Theodore J., 2020. "Who is an expert for foresight? A review of identification methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    11. Fontrier, Anna-Maria & Kamphuis, Bregtje W. & Kanavos, Panos, 2023. "How can health technology assessment be improved to optimise access to medicines? Results from a Delphi study in Europe," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120537, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Stanislav Birko & Edward S Dove & Vural Özdemir, 2015. "Evaluation of Nine Consensus Indices in Delphi Foresight Research and Their Dependency on Delphi Survey Characteristics: A Simulation Study and Debate on Delphi Design and Interpretation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-14, August.
    13. Marta Salgado & Ana C. L. Vieira & Anália Torres & Mónica D. Oliveira, 2020. "Selecting Indicators to Monitor and Assess Environmental Health in a Portuguese Urban Setting: A Participatory Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-16, November.
    14. Bale, Justine & Grové, Christine & Costello, Shane, 2020. "Building a mental health literacy model and verbal scale for children: Results of a Delphi study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    15. Meijering, Jurian V. & Tobi, Hilde, 2016. "The effect of controlled opinion feedback on Delphi features: Mixed messages from a real-world Delphi experiment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 166-173.
    16. Yildirim, Ercan & AR, Ilker Murat & Dabić, Marina & Baki, Birdogan & Peker, Iskender, 2022. "A multi-stage decision making model for determining a suitable innovation structure using an open innovation approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 379-391.
    17. Richiardi, Matteo & Bronka, Patryk & van de Ven, Justin & Kopasker, Daniel & Vittal Katikireddi, Srinivasa, 2023. "SimPaths: an open-source microsimulation model for life course analysis," Centre for Microsimulation and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series CEMPA6/23, Centre for Microsimulation and Policy Analysis at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    18. Bolger, Fergus & Rowe, Gene & Belton, Ian & Crawford, Megan M & Hamlin, Iain & Sissons, Aileen & Taylor Browne Lūka, Courtney & Vasilichi, Alexandrina & Wright, George, 2020. "The Simulated Group Response Paradigm: A new approach to the study of opinion change in Delphi and other structured-group techniques," OSF Preprints 4ufzg, Center for Open Science.
    19. Nur, Suardi & Burton, Bruce & Bergmann, Ariel, 2023. "Evidence on optimal risk allocation models for Indonesian geothermal projects under PPP contracts," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    20. Tiberius, Victor & Gojowy, Robin & Dabić, Marina, 2022. "Forecasting the future of robo advisory: A three-stage Delphi study on economic, technological, and societal implications," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:13:p:7947-:d:850975. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.