Angela Lawless
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Angela Lawless has a total of 84 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Fran Baum
University of Adelaide, Australia
30 shared publications - Toby Freeman
University of Adelaide
18 shared publications - Colin MacDougall
Flinders University
12 shared publications - Sara Javanparast
Flinders University
9 shared publications Carmel Williams
SA Health, Department of Health and Wellbeing, Adelaide, SA, Australia
8 shared publicationsGwyn Jolley
Southgate Institute for Health, Society, and Equity, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
7 shared publications
Latest Publications
- 23 November 2021
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Journal of Social Policy
- Vol. 52 (3) , 495-519
To what extent does early childhood education policy in Australia recognise and propose action on the social determinants of health and health equity?
Early childhood education (ECE) and development is internationally recognised as important to child health and wellbeing and to enabling children to become healthy productive adults. This paper analyses Australian ECE policy current in 2019. It uses the institutional framework of ideas, actors and institutions to determine the extent to which ECE policy recognises and acts on social determinants of health and health equity. We found that the policies supported integrated approaches, intersectoral collaboration and partnerships with parents and families. Evidence was important in formulating the ideas underpinning ECE policy. ECE was widely recognised as a social determinant of health, and the impacts of other social determinants of health and health equity were acknowledged. The ECE policies tended to be future-focused and not respond to social determinants that influence children and their families in the present time. The policies lacked strategies to address social determinants, or to engage with other sectors for this purpose. While some policies focused on breaking the cycle of disadvantage, they did not explore potential policy responses to pathways from intergenerational disadvantage to reduce poverty. Despite this, Australian ECE policy has achieved significant coherence, with shared understandings of the purpose and benefits of ECE.
- 23 November 2021
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Journal of Social Policy
- Vol. 52 (3) , 495-519
To what extent does early childhood education policy in Australia recognise and propose action on the social determinants of health and health equity?
Early childhood education (ECE) and development is internationally recognised as important to child health and wellbeing and to enabling children to become healthy productive adults. This paper analyses Australian ECE policy current in 2019. It uses the institutional framework of ideas, actors and institutions to determine the extent to which ECE policy recognises and acts on social determinants of health and health equity. We found that the policies supported integrated approaches, intersectoral collaboration and partnerships with parents and families. Evidence was important in formulating the ideas underpinning ECE policy. ECE was widely recognised as a social determinant of health, and the impacts of other social determinants of health and health equity were acknowledged. The ECE policies tended to be future-focused and not respond to social determinants that influence children and their families in the present time. The policies lacked strategies to address social determinants, or to engage with other sectors for this purpose. While some policies focused on breaking the cycle of disadvantage, they did not explore potential policy responses to pathways from intergenerational disadvantage to reduce poverty. Despite this, Australian ECE policy has achieved significant coherence, with shared understandings of the purpose and benefits of ECE.
- Open Access
- 18 January 2019
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Public Health
- Vol. 19 (1) , 1-16
To what extent can the activities of the South Australian Health in All Policies initiative be linked to population health outcomes using a program theory-based evaluation?
This paper reports on a five-year study using a theory-based program logic evaluation, and supporting survey and interview data to examine the extent to which the activites of the South Australian Health in All Policies initiative can be linked to population health outcomes. Mixed-methods data were collected between 2012 and 2016 in South Australia (144 semi-structured key informant interviews; two electronic surveys of public servants in 2013 (n = 435) and 2015 (n = 483); analysis of state government policy documents; and construction of a program logic model to shape assessment of the feasibility of attribution to population health outcomes). Multiple actions on social determinants of health in a range of state government sectors were reported and most could be linked through a program logic model to making some contribution to future population health outcomes. Context strongly influences implementation; not all initiatives will be successful and experimentation is vital. Successful initiatives included HiAP influencing the urban planning department to be more concerned with the health impacts of planning decisions, and encouraging the environment department to be concerned with the health impacts of its work. The theory-based program logic suggests that SA HiAP facilitated improved population health through working with multiple government departments. Public servants came to appreciate how their sectors impact on health. Program logic is a mechanism to evaluate complex public health interventions in a way that takes account of political and economic contexts. SA HiAP was mainly successful in avoiding lifestyle drift in strategy. The initiative encouraged a range of state government departments to tackle conditions of daily living. The broader underpinning factors dictating the distribution of power, money and resources were not addressed by HiAP. This reflects HiAP’s use of a consensus model which was driven by (rather than drove) state priorities and sought ‘win-win’ strategies.
- 18 January 2019
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Public Health
- Vol. 19 (1) , 1-16
Open AccessTo what extent can the activities of the South Australian Health in All Policies initiative be linked to population health outcomes using a program theory-based evaluation?
This paper reports on a five-year study using a theory-based program logic evaluation, and supporting survey and interview data to examine the extent to which the activites of the South Australian Health in All Policies initiative can be linked to population health outcomes. Mixed-methods data were collected between 2012 and 2016 in South Australia (144 semi-structured key informant interviews; two electronic surveys of public servants in 2013 (n = 435) and 2015 (n = 483); analysis of state government policy documents; and construction of a program logic model to shape assessment of the feasibility of attribution to population health outcomes). Multiple actions on social determinants of health in a range of state government sectors were reported and most could be linked through a program logic model to making some contribution to future population health outcomes. Context strongly influences implementation; not all initiatives will be successful and experimentation is vital. Successful initiatives included HiAP influencing the urban planning department to be more concerned with the health impacts of planning decisions, and encouraging the environment department to be concerned with the health impacts of its work. The theory-based program logic suggests that SA HiAP facilitated improved population health through working with multiple government departments. Public servants came to appreciate how their sectors impact on health. Program logic is a mechanism to evaluate complex public health interventions in a way that takes account of political and economic contexts. SA HiAP was mainly successful in avoiding lifestyle drift in strategy. The initiative encouraged a range of state government departments to tackle conditions of daily living. The broader underpinning factors dictating the distribution of power, money and resources were not addressed by HiAP. This reflects HiAP’s use of a consensus model which was driven by (rather than drove) state priorities and sought ‘win-win’ strategies.
- Open Access
- 29 December 2018
- Published by Springer Nature in Health Research Policy and Systems
- Vol. 16 (1) , 126
The value of a causal loop diagram in exploring the complex interplay of factors that influence health promotion in a multisectoral health system in Australia
Despite calls for the application of complex systems science in empirical studies of health promotion, there are very few examples. The aim of this paper was to use a complex systems approach to examine the key factors that influenced health promotion (HP) policy and practice in a multisectoral health system in Australia. Within a qualitative case study, a schema was developed that incorporated HP goals, actions and strategies with WHO building blocks (leadership and governance, financing, workforce, services and information). The case was a multisectoral health system bounded in terms of geographical and governance structures and a history of support for HP. A detailed analysis of 20 state government strategic documents and interviews with 53 stakeholders from multiple sectors were completed. Based upon key findings and dominants themes, causal pathways and feedback loops were established. Finally, a causal loop diagram was created to visualise the complex array of feedback loops in the multisectoral health system that influenced HP policy and practice. The complexity of the multisectoral health system was clearly illustrated by the numerous feedback mechanisms that influenced HP policy and practice. The majority of feedback mechanisms in the causal loop diagram were vicious cycles that inhibited HP policy and practice, which need to be disrupted or changed for HP to thrive. There were some virtuous cycles that facilitated HP, which could be amplified to strengthen HP policy and practice. Leadership and governance at federal–state–local government levels figured prominently and this building block was interdependently linked to all others. Creating a causal loop diagram enabled visualisation of the emergent properties of the case health system. It also highlighted specific leverage points at which HP policy and practice can be improved. This paper demonstrates the critical importance of leveraging leadership and governance for HP and adds urgency to the need for increased and strong advocacy efforts targeting all levels of government in multisectoral health systems.
- 29 December 2018
- Published by Springer Nature in Health Research Policy and Systems
- Vol. 16 (1) , 126
Open AccessThe value of a causal loop diagram in exploring the complex interplay of factors that influence health promotion in a multisectoral health system in Australia
Despite calls for the application of complex systems science in empirical studies of health promotion, there are very few examples. The aim of this paper was to use a complex systems approach to examine the key factors that influenced health promotion (HP) policy and practice in a multisectoral health system in Australia. Within a qualitative case study, a schema was developed that incorporated HP goals, actions and strategies with WHO building blocks (leadership and governance, financing, workforce, services and information). The case was a multisectoral health system bounded in terms of geographical and governance structures and a history of support for HP. A detailed analysis of 20 state government strategic documents and interviews with 53 stakeholders from multiple sectors were completed. Based upon key findings and dominants themes, causal pathways and feedback loops were established. Finally, a causal loop diagram was created to visualise the complex array of feedback loops in the multisectoral health system that influenced HP policy and practice. The complexity of the multisectoral health system was clearly illustrated by the numerous feedback mechanisms that influenced HP policy and practice. The majority of feedback mechanisms in the causal loop diagram were vicious cycles that inhibited HP policy and practice, which need to be disrupted or changed for HP to thrive. There were some virtuous cycles that facilitated HP, which could be amplified to strengthen HP policy and practice. Leadership and governance at federal–state–local government levels figured prominently and this building block was interdependently linked to all others. Creating a causal loop diagram enabled visualisation of the emergent properties of the case health system. It also highlighted specific leverage points at which HP policy and practice can be improved. This paper demonstrates the critical importance of leveraging leadership and governance for HP and adds urgency to the need for increased and strong advocacy efforts targeting all levels of government in multisectoral health systems.
- Open Access
- 11 November 2018
- Published by Maad Rayan Publishing Company in International Journal of Health Policy and Management
- Vol. 8 (1) , 61-62
Power, Process and Context in Theory Based Evaluation of Policy Implementation: A Response to Recent Commentaries
- 11 November 2018
- Published by Maad Rayan Publishing Company in International Journal of Health Policy and Management
- Vol. 8 (1) , 61-62
Open AccessPower, Process and Context in Theory Based Evaluation of Policy Implementation: A Response to Recent Commentaries
- Open Access
- 19 April 2018
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Health Promotion International
- Vol. 34 (4) , 833-846
Understanding Australian policies on public health using social and political science theories: reflections from an Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia Workshop
There is strong, and growing, evidence documenting health inequities across the world. However, most governments do not prioritize policies to encourage action on the social determinants of health and health equity. Furthermore, despite evidence concerning the benefits of joined-up, intersectoral policy to promote health and health equity, it is rare for such policy approaches to be applied systematically. To examine the usefulness of political and social science theory in understanding the reasons for this disjuncture between evidence and practice, researchers and public servants gathered in Adelaide for an Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia (ASSA) Workshop. This paper draws together the learnings that emerged from the Workshop, including key messages about the usefulness of various theories as well as insights drawn from policy practice. Discussions during the Workshop highlighted that applying multiple theories is particularly helpful in directing attention to, and understanding, the influence of all stages of the policy process; from the construction and framing of policy problems, to the implementation of policy and evaluation of outcomes, including those outcomes that may be unintended. In addition, the Workshop emphasized the value of collaborations among public health researchers, political and social scientists and public servants to open up critical discussion about the intersections between theory, research evidence and practice. Such critique is vital to render visible the processes through which particular sources of knowledge may be privileged over others and to examine how political and bureaucratic environments shape policy proposals and implementation action.
- 19 April 2018
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Health Promotion International
- Vol. 34 (4) , 833-846
Open AccessUnderstanding Australian policies on public health using social and political science theories: reflections from an Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia Workshop
There is strong, and growing, evidence documenting health inequities across the world. However, most governments do not prioritize policies to encourage action on the social determinants of health and health equity. Furthermore, despite evidence concerning the benefits of joined-up, intersectoral policy to promote health and health equity, it is rare for such policy approaches to be applied systematically. To examine the usefulness of political and social science theory in understanding the reasons for this disjuncture between evidence and practice, researchers and public servants gathered in Adelaide for an Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia (ASSA) Workshop. This paper draws together the learnings that emerged from the Workshop, including key messages about the usefulness of various theories as well as insights drawn from policy practice. Discussions during the Workshop highlighted that applying multiple theories is particularly helpful in directing attention to, and understanding, the influence of all stages of the policy process; from the construction and framing of policy problems, to the implementation of policy and evaluation of outcomes, including those outcomes that may be unintended. In addition, the Workshop emphasized the value of collaborations among public health researchers, political and social scientists and public servants to open up critical discussion about the intersections between theory, research evidence and practice. Such critique is vital to render visible the processes through which particular sources of knowledge may be privileged over others and to examine how political and bureaucratic environments shape policy proposals and implementation action.
- 3 January 2018
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Critical Public Health
- Vol. 29 (2) , 228-240
Disappearing health system building blocks in the health promotion policy context in South Australia (2003–2013)
Policy contexts for health promotion (HP) are often reported to be unsupportive. However, in South Australia, there is a long history of support. This paper reports on the research question: To what extent were key South Australian (SA) policies and strategic documents supportive of HP and health system building blocks for HP from 2003 to 2013? Twenty SA government documents were examined through an analysis of HP (goal, actions and strategies) and World Health Organization health system building blocks. The policy and practice context changed from strong support for HP in 2003 to its near abandonment in 2013. Key findings include: a wavering commitment to reducing health inequities as well as indeterminate support for community participation. In terms of leadership and governance for HP, there was an abdication of ‘health governance’ for reorienting health services toward HP, although there was a strong focus on ‘governance for health’ through intersectoral collaboration. Other system building blocks were supported to varying levels; however, in 2013, financing, workforce and HP practice were found to have disappeared from the policy agenda. Information as a system building block was also a key theme. On one hand, the importance of monitoring population health was commonly discussed, and on the other, the lack of evidence of HP effectiveness was significant in decisions that led to the decline in the HP policy and practice. This review of key SA government documents over a 10-year period offered a striking picture of how the HP policy context changed in one Australian state.
- 3 January 2018
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Critical Public Health
- Vol. 29 (2) , 228-240
Disappearing health system building blocks in the health promotion policy context in South Australia (2003–2013)
Policy contexts for health promotion (HP) are often reported to be unsupportive. However, in South Australia, there is a long history of support. This paper reports on the research question: To what extent were key South Australian (SA) policies and strategic documents supportive of HP and health system building blocks for HP from 2003 to 2013? Twenty SA government documents were examined through an analysis of HP (goal, actions and strategies) and World Health Organization health system building blocks. The policy and practice context changed from strong support for HP in 2003 to its near abandonment in 2013. Key findings include: a wavering commitment to reducing health inequities as well as indeterminate support for community participation. In terms of leadership and governance for HP, there was an abdication of ‘health governance’ for reorienting health services toward HP, although there was a strong focus on ‘governance for health’ through intersectoral collaboration. Other system building blocks were supported to varying levels; however, in 2013, financing, workforce and HP practice were found to have disappeared from the policy agenda. Information as a system building block was also a key theme. On one hand, the importance of monitoring population health was commonly discussed, and on the other, the lack of evidence of HP effectiveness was significant in decisions that led to the decline in the HP policy and practice. This review of key SA government documents over a 10-year period offered a striking picture of how the HP policy context changed in one Australian state.
- Open Access
- 25 October 2017
- Published by MDPI AG in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
- Vol. 14 (11) , 1288
Health in All Policies in South Australia—Did It Promote and Enact an Equity Perspective?
Mobilising cross-sectoral action is helpful in addressing the range of social determinants that contribute to health inequities. The South Australian Health in All Policies (SA HiAP) approach was implemented from 2007 to stimulate cross-sector policy activity to address the social determinants of health to improve population wellbeing and reduce health inequities. This paper presents selected findings from a five year multi-methods research study of the SA HiAP approach and draws on data collected during interviews, observation, case studies, and document analysis. The analysis shows that SA HiAP had dual goals of facilitating joined-up government for co-benefits (process focus); and addressing social determinants of health and inequities through cross-sectoral policy activity (outcomes focus). Government agencies readily understood HiAP as providing tools for improving the process of intersectoral policy development, while the more distal outcome-focused intent of improving equity was not well understood and gained less traction. While some early rhetorical support existed for progressing an equity agenda through SA HiAP, subsequent economic pressures resulted in the government narrowing its priorities to economic goals. The paper concludes that SA HiAP’s initial intentions to address equity were only partially enacted and little was done to reduce inequities. Emerging opportunities in SA, and internationally, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals, may revive interest in addressing equity.
- 25 October 2017
- Published by MDPI AG in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
- Vol. 14 (11) , 1288
Open AccessHealth in All Policies in South Australia—Did It Promote and Enact an Equity Perspective?
Mobilising cross-sectoral action is helpful in addressing the range of social determinants that contribute to health inequities. The South Australian Health in All Policies (SA HiAP) approach was implemented from 2007 to stimulate cross-sector policy activity to address the social determinants of health to improve population wellbeing and reduce health inequities. This paper presents selected findings from a five year multi-methods research study of the SA HiAP approach and draws on data collected during interviews, observation, case studies, and document analysis. The analysis shows that SA HiAP had dual goals of facilitating joined-up government for co-benefits (process focus); and addressing social determinants of health and inequities through cross-sectoral policy activity (outcomes focus). Government agencies readily understood HiAP as providing tools for improving the process of intersectoral policy development, while the more distal outcome-focused intent of improving equity was not well understood and gained less traction. While some early rhetorical support existed for progressing an equity agenda through SA HiAP, subsequent economic pressures resulted in the government narrowing its priorities to economic goals. The paper concludes that SA HiAP’s initial intentions to address equity were only partially enacted and little was done to reduce inequities. Emerging opportunities in SA, and internationally, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals, may revive interest in addressing equity.
- Open Access
- 22 October 2017
- Published by Maad Rayan Publishing Company in International Journal of Health Policy and Management
- Vol. 7 (6) , 510-521
Developing a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia
Background The importance of evaluating policy processes to achieve health equity is well recognised but such evaluation encounters methodological, theoretical and political challenges. This paper describes how a program theorybased evaluation framework can be developed and tested, using the example of an evaluation of the South Australian Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiative. Methods A framework of the theorised components and relationships of the HiAP initiative was produced to guide evaluation. The framework was the product of a collaborative, iterative process underpinned by a policy-research partnership and drew on social and political science theory and relevant policy literature. Results The process engaged key stakeholders to capture both HiAP specific and broader bureaucratic knowledge and was informed by a number of social and political science theories. The framework provides a basis for exploring the interactions between framework components and how they shape policy-making and public policy. It also enables an assessment of HiAP’s success in integrating health and equity considerations in policies, thereby laying a foundation for predicting the impacts of resulting policies. Conclusion The use of a program theory-based evaluation framework developed through a consultative process and informed by social and political science theory has accommodated the complexity of public policy-making. The framework allows for examination of HiAP processes and impacts, and for the tracking of contribution towards distal outcomes through the explicit articulation of the underpinning program theory.
- 22 October 2017
- Published by Maad Rayan Publishing Company in International Journal of Health Policy and Management
- Vol. 7 (6) , 510-521
Open AccessDeveloping a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia
Background The importance of evaluating policy processes to achieve health equity is well recognised but such evaluation encounters methodological, theoretical and political challenges. This paper describes how a program theorybased evaluation framework can be developed and tested, using the example of an evaluation of the South Australian Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiative. Methods A framework of the theorised components and relationships of the HiAP initiative was produced to guide evaluation. The framework was the product of a collaborative, iterative process underpinned by a policy-research partnership and drew on social and political science theory and relevant policy literature. Results The process engaged key stakeholders to capture both HiAP specific and broader bureaucratic knowledge and was informed by a number of social and political science theories. The framework provides a basis for exploring the interactions between framework components and how they shape policy-making and public policy. It also enables an assessment of HiAP’s success in integrating health and equity considerations in policies, thereby laying a foundation for predicting the impacts of resulting policies. Conclusion The use of a program theory-based evaluation framework developed through a consultative process and informed by social and political science theory has accommodated the complexity of public policy-making. The framework allows for examination of HiAP processes and impacts, and for the tracking of contribution towards distal outcomes through the explicit articulation of the underpinning program theory.
- Open Access
- 16 October 2017
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Public Health
- Vol. 17 (1) , 811
Ideas, actors and institutions: lessons from South Australian Health in All Policies on what encourages other sectors’ involvement
Background This paper examines the extent to which actors from sectors other than health engaged with the South Australian Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiative, determines why they were prepared to do so and explains the mechanisms by which successful engagement happened. This examination applies theories of policy development and implementation. Methods The paper draws on a five year study of the implementation of HiAP comprising document analysis, a log of key events, detailed interviews with 64 policy actors and two surveys of public servants. Results The findings are analysed within an institutional policy analysis framework and examine the extent to which ideas, institutional factors and actor agency influenced the willingness of actors from other sectors to work with Health sector staff under the HiAP initiative. In terms of ideas, there was wide acceptance of the role of social determinants in shaping health and the importance of action to promote health in all government agencies. The institutional environment was initially supportive, but support waned over the course of the study when the economy in South Australia became less buoyant and a health minister less supportive of health promotion took office. The existence of a HiAP Unit was very helpful for gaining support from other sectors. A new Public Health Act offered some promise of institutionalising the HiAP approach and ideas. The analysis concludes that a key factor was the operation of a supportive network of public servants who promoted HiAP, including some who were senior and influential. Conclusions The South Australian case study demonstrates that despite institutional constraints and shifting political support within the health sector, HiAP gained traction in other sectors. The key factors that encouraged the commitment of others sectors to HiAP were the existence of a supportive, knowledgeable policy network, political support, institutionalisation of the ideas and approach, and balancing of the economic and social goals of government.
- 16 October 2017
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Public Health
- Vol. 17 (1) , 811
Open AccessIdeas, actors and institutions: lessons from South Australian Health in All Policies on what encourages other sectors’ involvement
Background This paper examines the extent to which actors from sectors other than health engaged with the South Australian Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiative, determines why they were prepared to do so and explains the mechanisms by which successful engagement happened. This examination applies theories of policy development and implementation. Methods The paper draws on a five year study of the implementation of HiAP comprising document analysis, a log of key events, detailed interviews with 64 policy actors and two surveys of public servants. Results The findings are analysed within an institutional policy analysis framework and examine the extent to which ideas, institutional factors and actor agency influenced the willingness of actors from other sectors to work with Health sector staff under the HiAP initiative. In terms of ideas, there was wide acceptance of the role of social determinants in shaping health and the importance of action to promote health in all government agencies. The institutional environment was initially supportive, but support waned over the course of the study when the economy in South Australia became less buoyant and a health minister less supportive of health promotion took office. The existence of a HiAP Unit was very helpful for gaining support from other sectors. A new Public Health Act offered some promise of institutionalising the HiAP approach and ideas. The analysis concludes that a key factor was the operation of a supportive network of public servants who promoted HiAP, including some who were senior and influential. Conclusions The South Australian case study demonstrates that despite institutional constraints and shifting political support within the health sector, HiAP gained traction in other sectors. The key factors that encouraged the commitment of others sectors to HiAP were the existence of a supportive, knowledgeable policy network, political support, institutionalisation of the ideas and approach, and balancing of the economic and social goals of government.
- Open Access
What is the difference between comprehensive and selective primary health care? Evidence from a five-year longitudinal realist case study in South Australia
Background Since the WHO’s Alma Ata Declaration on Primary Health Care (PHC) there has been debate about the advisability of adopting comprehensive or selective PHC. Proponents of the latter argue that a more selective approach will enable interim gains while proponents of a comprehensive approach argue that it is needed to address the underlying causes of ill health and improve health outcomes sustainably. Methods This research is based on four case studies of government-funded and run PHC services in Adelaide, South Australia. Program logic models were constructed from interviews and workshops. The initial model represented relatively comprehensive service provision in 2010. Subsequent interviews in 2013 permitted the construction of a selective PHC program logic model following a series of restructuring service changes. Results Comparison of the PHC service program logic models before and after restructuring illustrates the changes to the operating context, underlying mechanisms, service qualities, activities, activity outcomes and anticipated community health outcomes. The PHC services moved from focusing on a range of community, group and individual clinical activities to a focus on the management of people with chronic disease. Under the more comprehensive model, activities were along a continuum of promotive, preventive, rehabilitative and curative. Under the selective model, the focus moved to rehabilitative and curative with very little other activities. Conclusion The study demonstrates the difference between selective and comprehensive approaches to PHC in a rich country setting and is useful in informing debates on PHC especially in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals.
Open AccessWhat is the difference between comprehensive and selective primary health care? Evidence from a five-year longitudinal realist case study in South Australia
Background Since the WHO’s Alma Ata Declaration on Primary Health Care (PHC) there has been debate about the advisability of adopting comprehensive or selective PHC. Proponents of the latter argue that a more selective approach will enable interim gains while proponents of a comprehensive approach argue that it is needed to address the underlying causes of ill health and improve health outcomes sustainably. Methods This research is based on four case studies of government-funded and run PHC services in Adelaide, South Australia. Program logic models were constructed from interviews and workshops. The initial model represented relatively comprehensive service provision in 2010. Subsequent interviews in 2013 permitted the construction of a selective PHC program logic model following a series of restructuring service changes. Results Comparison of the PHC service program logic models before and after restructuring illustrates the changes to the operating context, underlying mechanisms, service qualities, activities, activity outcomes and anticipated community health outcomes. The PHC services moved from focusing on a range of community, group and individual clinical activities to a focus on the management of people with chronic disease. Under the more comprehensive model, activities were along a continuum of promotive, preventive, rehabilitative and curative. Under the selective model, the focus moved to rehabilitative and curative with very little other activities. Conclusion The study demonstrates the difference between selective and comprehensive approaches to PHC in a rich country setting and is useful in informing debates on PHC especially in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals.