Transdisziplinäre Forschung in der Gesundheitsförderung bei Studierenden – ein systematisches Review

Gürster, Antonia; Helten, Jessica; Tittlbach, Susanne

doi:10.1007/s11553-021-00919-9

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been shown that the participation of students themselves (e.g. student groups or representative boards) is a crucial element in health-promoting networks at university [ 89 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing mechanisms of interdisciplinary cooperation in promoting students’ health at university

Bachert,

Wolbring,

Hildebrand

et al. 2023

BMC Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Interdisciplinary cooperation among university actors and resulting intersectoral synergies are considered cornerstones in the process of incorporating health promotion practices in everyday university life in order to break down barriers and provide better access to health promotion services. To date, no network of a health-promoting university has been examined regarding the processes underlying tie formation, network emergence, and maintenance. Objectives and methods The goals of this study are to obtain insight into the mechanisms of cooperation between university actors in a health-promoting network and to identify the structural and attributive factors associated with establishing cooperation between actors in the observed network in order to better understand how to build and develop successful networks in the future. For this purpose, a social network analysis was carried out and exponential random graph models were estimated to test corresponding hypotheses. Results The network at hand consists of 33 actors (e.g. University Sports Center, General Student Committee) and shows a flat, non-hierarchical structure. Data reveal that attributed competence predicts cooperation (0.32; p < 0.05). Significant homophily effects among student actors (1.31; p < 0.05) and among university actors (0.59; p < 0.05) were found. All structural predictors examined were significant (0.22–5.40; p < 0.05) and are therefore essential in determining the likelihood of cooperation between actors involved in the network. Conclusion The results of this study provide for a better understanding of the mechanisms of cooperation and can be used to further develop the network at hand (e.g. selection of key actors for information dissemination or integration of peripheral actors). In addition, the findings offer starting points for sustained network development at other universities (e.g. significance of network governance form or goal consensus). Knowing the factors that influence the network structure, here the conditions of cooperation, results in opportunities to encourage empowerment among actors. However, the analysis of the network undertaken does not directly bear on the success of the network.

show abstract

“…It has been shown that the participation of students themselves (e.g. student groups or representative boards) is a crucial element in health-promoting networks at university [ 89 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%