Journal of Public Health
Oxford University Press
About: Journal of Public Health is an academic journal published by Oxford University Press. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Public health & Population. It has an ISSN identifier of 1741-3842. Over the lifetime, 5540 publications have been published receiving 98337 citations. The journal is also known as: Journal of the Faculty of Public Health of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom.
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: The biasing effects of mode of questionnaire administration has important implications for research methodology, the validity of the results of research, and for the soundness of public policy developed from evidence using questionnaire-based research.
Abstract: Background One of the main primary data collection instruments in social, health and epidemiological research is the survey questionnaire. Modes of data collection by questionnaire differ in several ways, including the method of contacting respondents, the medium of delivering the questionnaire to respondents, and the administration of the questions. These are likely to have different effects on the quality of the data collected. Methods This paper is based on a narrative review of systematic and non-systematic searches of the literature on the effects of mode of questionnaire administration on data quality. Results Within different modes of questionnaire administration, there were many documented potential, biasing influences on the responses obtained. These were greatest between different types of mode (e.g. self-administered versus interview modes), rather than within modes. It can be difficult to separate out the effects of the different influences, at different levels. Conclusions The biasing effects of mode of questionnaire administration has important implications for research methodology, the validity of the results of research, and for the soundness of public policy developed from evidence using questionnaire-based research. All users of questionnaires need to be aware of these potential effects on their data.
TL;DR: GPAQv2 is a suitable physical activity surveillance instrument for developing countries and enables countries to follow trends over time, understand regional and global comparisons, and better inform physical activity policy decisions.
Abstract: The aim of developing the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) was to have a tool that would produce valid and reliable estimates of physical activity, especially relevant to developing countries where patterns of energy expenditure differ from developed countries because people experience diverse ways of life. The development of a standardized tool to measure physical activity that enables comparisons across culturally diverse populations is a challenging task. Comparable, valid, and reliable information on physical activity enables countries to follow trends over time, understand regional and global comparisons, and better inform physical activity policy decisions. A WHO expert working group on physical activity measurement provided a draft GPAQ for global consultation. The draft instrument was validated in nine countries. Validation studies and qualitative feedback on GPAQ were presented at an Expert Meeting on Global Physical Activity Surveillance held jointly by WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A second round of global consultation led to minor revisions and preparation of a final GPAQ version 2 instrument (GPAQv2). Around 50 developing countries are now using GPAQ for physical activity data collection. GPAQv2 is a suitable physical activity surveillance instrument for developing countries.
TL;DR: Most studies reported findings that generally supported the view that green space have a beneficial health effect, and Simplistic urban interventions may therefore fail to address the underlying determinants of urban health that are not remediable by landscape redesign.
Abstract: Background Urban development projects can be costly and have health impacts. An evidence-based approach to urban planning is therefore essential. However, the evidence for physical and non-physical health benefits of urban green space is unclear. Methods A literature search of academic and grey literature was conducted for studies and reviews of the health effects of green space. Articles found were appraised for their relevance, critically reviewed and graded accordingly. Their findings were then thematically categorized. Results There is weak evidence for the links between physical, mental health and well-being, and urban green space. Environmental factors such as the quality and accessibility of green space affects its use for physical activity. User determinants, such as age, gender, ethnicity and the perception of safety, are also important. However, many studies were limited by poor study design, failure to exclude confounding, bias or reverse causality and weak statistical associations. Conclusion Most studies reported findings that generally supported the view that green space have a beneficial health effect. Establishing a causal relationship is difficult, as the relationship is complex. Simplistic urban interventions may therefore fail to address the underlying determinants of urban health that are not remediable by landscape redesign.
TL;DR: Research conducted in 2003–2006 in the EU-15 countries on how consumers perceive, understand, like and use nutrition information on food labels is reviewed to provide new insights into consumer liking and understanding of simplified front of pack signposting formats.
Abstract: The aim of this study was to review research conducted in 2003–2006 in the EU-15 countries on how consumers perceive, understand, like and use nutrition information on food labels. Based on a search of databases on academic publications, Google-based search, and enquiries directed to a range of food retailers, food companies, consumer associations and government agencies, a total of 58 studies were identified. These studies were summarised using a standard format guided by a model of consumer information processing, and these summaries were subsequently processed using the MAXqda software in order to identify key findings and common themes across the studies. The studies show widespread consumer interest in nutrition information on food packages, though this interest varies across situations and products. Consumers like the idea of simplified front of pack information but differ in their liking for the various formats. Differences can be related to conflicting preferences for ease of use, being fully informed and not being pressurised into behaving in a particular way. Most consumers understand the most common signposting formats in the sense that they themselves believe that they understand them and they can replay key information presented to them in an experimental situation. There is, however, virtually no insight into how labelling information is, or will be, used in a real-world shopping situation, and how it will affect consumers’ dietary patterns. Results are largely in line with an earlier review by Cowburn and Stockley (Public Health Nutr 8:21–28, 2005), covering research up to 2002, but provide new insights into consumer liking and understanding of simplified front of pack signposting formats. There is an urgent need for more research studying consumer use of nutritional information on food labels in a real-world setting.
TL;DR: A crucial step in the systematic review process is to thoroughly define the scope of the research question, particularly one with a very broad topic scope, such as those edited by the Cochrane Public Health Group.
Abstract: Systematic reviews use a transparent and systematic process to define a research question, search for studies, assess their quality and synthesize findings qualitatively or quantitatively. A crucial step in the systematic review process is to thoroughly define the scope of the research question. This requires an understanding of existing literature, including gaps and uncertainties, clarification of definitions related to the research question and an understanding of the way in which these are conceptualized within existing literature. This information is often acquired in an ad hoc fashion, however a useful and increasingly popular way to collect and organize important background information and develop a picture of the existing evidence base is to conduct a scoping review. Such reviews may be published as a research outcome in their own right and are appealing since they produce a broad map of the evidence that, if sufficiently transparent and widely available via publication, can be used by many and for applications beyond the authors originally intended purpose. Scoping reviews can inform a systematic review, particularly one with a very broad topic scope, such as those edited by the Cochrane Public Health Group.