Health Promotion International Advance Access originally published online on June 17, 2005
Health Promotion International 2005 20(3):306-315; doi:10.1093/heapro/dai008
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DEBATE |
The development of quality criteria for research: a Finnish approach
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, PO Box 33, FIN-00023, Helsink, Finland, 1Finnish Centre for Health Promotion, Helsinki, Finland and 2Research Centre for Health Promotion, University of Bergen, Norway
Address for correspondence: Maurice B. Mittelmark, Research Centre for Health Promotion, University of Bergen, Christiesgt. 13 5015 Bergen, Norway E-mail: maurice.mittelmark{at}psyhp.uib.no
Health promotion research is distinct in some respects from research within its contributing disciplines. A study was conducted in Finland to identify the special characteristics and distinctiveness of health promotion research, to develop a set of specific quality evaluation criteria for health promotion research, and to test the usefulness of such criteria in selecting research applications for funding. A wide range of discussions supplemented a systematic literature review with experts within and outside Finland. The review was conducted with regard to the content of health promotion, its basic principles, as well as theories and models used to steer practical health promotion activities. This resulted in a proposal for quality criteria for health promotion research. Key informants from Finnish universities and institutes evaluated the criteria in three Delphi rounds, and they were suitably revised. The utility of the revised criteria was tested using 31 research proposals. After further revision, the criteria were tested with a further 16 research proposals. Seven health promotion research quality criteria were developed by these methods, as were seven general criteria of research quality, applicable to all social research, whether in the health promotion arena or not. The 14 criteria will undergo continuous revision for improvement, but they are already at this stage thought to be suitable for use by (a) funding agencies in the design of calls for health promotion research proposals, and calls for tenders; (b) researchers who respond to calls for health promotion research proposals and/or calls for tenders; (c) evaluators and proposal review groups; and (d) reviewers and auditors of research progress.
Key words: health promotion; research; quality criteria
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. T. Wright, B. Roche, H. von Unger, M. Block, and B. Gardner A call for an International Collaboration on Participatory Research for Health Health Promot. Int., October 23, 2009; (2009) dap043v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. B. Mittelmark Setting an ethical agenda for health promotion Health Promot. Int., March 1, 2008; 23(1): 78 - 85. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Kwak, S. P. J. Kremers, M. A. van Baak, and J. Brug Participation rates in worksite-based intervention studies: health promotion context as a crucial quality criterion Health Promot. Int., March 1, 2006; 21(1): 66 - 69. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. de Leeuw Who gets what: politics, evidence, and health promotion Health Promot. Int., September 1, 2005; 20(3): 211 - 212. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
