No abstract

We propose a new approach to guide health promotion practice. Health promotion should draw on 2 related systems of reasoning: an evidential system and an ethical system. Further, there are concepts, values, and procedures inherent in both health promotion evidence and ethics, and these should be made explicit. We illustrate our approach with the exemplar of intervention in weight, and use a specific mass-media campaign to show the real-world dangers of intervening with insufficient attention to ethics and evidence. Both researchers and health promotion practitioners should work to build the capacities required for evidential and ethical deliberation in the health promotion profession.

Issue addressed Complex health promotion programs, which can have multilevels of implementation and multi‐components with nonlinear causal pathways, present many evaluation challenges. Traditional evaluation methods often fail to account for the complexity inherent in assessing these programs. In real‐world settings, evaluations of complex programs are often beset by additional constraints of limited budgets and short timeframes. Determining whether a complex program is successful and how a program worked requires evaluators of complex programs to adopt a level of pragmatism. Methods This paper describes a pragmatic evaluation approach used to evaluate the Get Healthy at Work workplace health promotion program, implemented in New South Wales, Australia. Using the program as a case study, we describe some key principles for applying a pragmatic evaluation approach and use these principles to develop an appropriate evaluation strategy. Results The evaluation includes multiple research methods to assess program outputs and implementation; and identify emergent program impacts, within constrained resources. The evaluation was guided by epistemological flexibility, methodological comprehensiveness and operational practicality. Conclusion Health promotion programs, such as state‐wide obesity prevention programs, require appropriate evaluation methods which address their inherent complexity amidst the real‐world evaluation constraints, and focuses on the essential evaluation needs. So what The main complex program evaluation principles are applicable to other multilevel health promotion programs, challenged by methodological and practical or political constraints.

No abstract

BackgroundWorkplace health programs (WHPs) may improve adult health but very little evidence exists on multi-level WHPs implemented at-scale and so the relationship between program implementation factors and outcomes of WHPs are poorly understood. This study evaluated Get Healthy at Work (GHaW), a state-wide government-funded WHP in Australia.MethodsA mixed-method design included a longitudinal quasi-experimental survey of businesses registered with GHaW and a comparison group of businesses surveyed over a 12-month period. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with key contacts and employees of selected intervention group businesses and the service providers of the program were conducted to assess program adoption and adaptation.ResultsPositive business-level changes in workplace culture were observed over time among GHaW businesses compared with the control group. Multilevel regression modelling revealed perceptions that employees were generally healthy (p = 0.045 timeXgroup effect) and that the workplace promoted healthy behaviours (p = 0.004 timeXgroup effect) improved significantly while the control group reported no change in work culture perceptions. Changes in perceptions about work productivity were not observed; however only one third of businesses registered for the program had adopted GHaW during the evaluation period. Qualitative results revealed a number of factors contributing to program adoption: which depended on program delivery (e.g., logistics, technology and communication channels), design features of the program, and organisational factors (primarily business size and previous experience of WHPs).ConclusionsEvaluation of program factors is important to improve program delivery and uptake and to ensure greater scalability. GHaW has the potential to improve workplace health culture, which may lead to better health promoting work environments. These results imply that government can play a central role in enabling prioritisation and incentivising health promotion in the workplace.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-6493-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.