Rural community systems: Youth physical activity promotion through community collaboration.
Rural community systems: Youth physical activity promotion through community collaboration.
复制标题
农村社区系统：通过社区合作促进青年体育活动。
DOI：
10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101486
复制
发表时间：
2021-09
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Dzewaltowski DA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kellstedt DK;Schenkelberg MA;Essay AM;Welk GJ;Rosenkranz RR;Idoate R;Ramos AK;Grimm B;Dzewaltowski DA
社区系统方法对于确定社会和地理健康影响很重要。居住在城市内的社区利益相关者具有较高的信任和集体效能得分。这些利益攸关方发挥了直接领导青年体育活动机会的作用。青少年在社区中的体育活动更多，利益相关者扮演着行政角色。应该研究独特的社区变量，以阐明体力活动的系统驱动因素。解决农村人口健康问题的一种常见方式是通过社区利益攸关方共同努力。青少年体育活动(PA)发生在成人主导的校内和校外群体机会中，这些机会因社区而异，通常发生在孤立的环境中。本研究探讨了农村社区系统结构和协作过程变量的异同，这些变量有助于概念化影响人口青年PA结果的协作影响。2018-2019年招募了利益攸关方(社区1，n=2 3；社区2，n=2 6)和青年(社区1，n=2 0 5；社区2，n=2 13)，作为Wellscape的一部分，这是一项混合执行-有效性社区随机试验。一项利益相关者调查(n=49)衡量了社区系统结构和协作流程。青年完成了青年活动概况，以衡量PA水平。居住在城市范围内的社区1的受访者比社区2的受访者多(73.9%比34.6%)。社区1的集体效能(M=10.0，SD=0.05)显著高于社区2(M=0.02，SD=0.04)，P<0.05。社区1的信任感得分(M=4.1，SD=100.3)显著高于社区2(M=33.3，SD=00.5)，P<0.05。虽然两个社区都符合农村的定义，并有利益相关者投资，但社区1有更大比例的利益相关者实施PA，更多的人居住在城市范围内，这可能影响了该社区在集体效能和信任方面的较高得分。社区2在管理员角色中有更多的利益相关者，并产生了更高的青年PA水平。在理解影响青年PA的制度因素时，应考虑农村社区的独特和共同变量。
A community systems approach is important to identify social and geographic health impacts. Community stakeholders residing within the city had higher trust and collective efficacy scores. These stakeholders had roles directly leading physical activity opportunities for youth. Youth physical activity was greater in the community with stakeholders in administrative roles. Unique community variables should be studied to elucidate system drivers of physical activity. A common way to address rural population health issues is through community stakeholders working together. Youth physical activity (PA) happens in adult-led in-school and out-of-school group opportunities that vary across communities and generally occur in isolated settings. This study explores similarities and differences in rural community system structure and collaborative process variables that help to conceptualize the collaborative impact influencing population youth PA outcomes. Stakeholders (Community 1, n = 23; Community 2, n = 26) and youth (Community 1, n = 205; Community 2, n = 213) were recruited in 2018–2019 as part of Wellscapes, a hybrid implementation-effectiveness community randomized trial. A stakeholder survey (n = 49) measured community system structures and collaboration processes. Youth completed the Youth Activity Profile to measure PA levels. More Community 1 respondents than Community 2 resided within city limits (73.9% vs. 34.6%). Collective efficacy was significantly greater in Community 1 (M = 4.0, SD = 0.5) than in 2 (M = 3.2, SD = 0.4), p < 0.05. Perceptions of trust scored significantly greater in Community 1 (M = 4.1, SD = 0.3) than in 2 (M = 3.3, SD = 0.5), p < 0.05. Though both communities met rural definitions and had stakeholder investment, Community 1 had a greater proportion of PA-implementing stakeholders and more residing within city limits which may have influenced that community’s higher scores in collective efficacy and trust. Community 2 had more stakeholders in administrator roles and yielded greater youth PA levels. Unique and common variables of rural communities should be considered in understanding system factors that impact youth PA.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
BATES, FL;BACON, L
通讯作者：
BACON, L
影响因子：
9.7
作者：
Bennett, Kevin J.;Borders, Tyrone F.;Ziller, Erika
通讯作者：
Ziller, Erika
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Kok, Gerjo;Gurabardhi, Zamira;Zijlstra, Fred R. H.
通讯作者：
Zijlstra, Fred R. H.
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Dzewaltowski, David A.;Estabrooks, Paul A.;Johnston, Judy A.
通讯作者：
Johnston, Judy A.
影响因子：
1.3
作者：
Emery, Mary;Flora, Cornelia
通讯作者：
Flora, Cornelia