Wow thanks so much for your help!
Just to be annoying and double check, would you say these new notes are adequate enough then?
Program descriptions: probably need a bit more detail about how they’re implemented.
Links to health: perfect
Links to social model: excellent in some sections, a bit sketchy in others; e.g. in MOTION, one of your explanations was ‘Addresses the broader determinants of health such as social inclusion and connectedness.’ You’d need to expand a bit more (most of that’s just the name of the principle), being more specific about exactly where in the program it demonstrates social inclusion and connectedness, and also naming what type of determinant is being addressed, rather than just ‘broader’ (social determinants). Just more detail on a couple of these would be good
That said, I’m thinking about answering a question in the exam. I wouldn’t put these details in your notes, as you don’t have to
learn them. This is more a
skill, the skill of identifying aspects of the social model/Ottawa Charter from ANY program. So it's less important to learn some, and more important to practise it in different case studies. (e.g. also try applying Ottawa Charter to these).
i don't really understand when a question asks how does this( whatever they are talking about) improve global health. i mean when the whole case study is talking about an individual or a community how can you talk about their improvement of health in a global context?
thank you
Love how everyone asks the questions I asked too...
Most programs target developing countries; thus, they promote
equity in health worldwide by improving the health of a country that’s currently hopelessly disadvantaged, and bringing it up closer to other countries. Also, a small program
contributes to overall improved health – it’s lots of tiny programs working together that promote health worldwide.
I agree it’s stupid, but meh, you just have to know how to answer the question: explain the impact of the program on health status, and then throw in phrases like ‘for all people worldwide’ or (which I prefer as it’s more true) ‘promoting equity in health worldwide’.
I think you could justify either positive or negative in my opinion. As long as there's reasoning either should be fine
Does anyone have any tips on choosing health promotion programs for NHPA's so that they double up??? I was thinking I could use the same one for injury prevention and control (suicide) and mental health??
Also, what are the things you need to say to get the marks for a health promotion program??
Just always make sure it’s as relevant as possible, and make 100% sure you
really clearly draw the link between the program and burden of disease from that NHPA, in detail. Obesity-related programs cover obesity, CV health and diabetes mellitus; mental health programs cover what you said; that’s about it.
To describe one program that aims to decrease burden of disease from one NHPA:
1.
name the program
2.
who is running the program
3. what is the program’s
aims4.
how do they do it (bulk of your response)
5. the
impact of this on the NHPA
Remember to be as specific as possible and include enough detail, especially on point 4.