Scholarlink

Background <p>Population health interventions may change physical, social or fiscal environments to shift health behaviours and often operate within a complex system of interacting factors. Systems methods are frequently suggested as a way to provide an overview of the interactions that determine behaviours or actions and may help to understand how or why interventions might (or might not) change health. However, there are few examples of how these methods have been used to guide empirical evaluations of public health interventions.</p> Methods <p>We describe our application of a qualitative complex systems approach within an ongoing evaluation of a population health intervention: traffic restriction schemes, often referred to as School Streets, where motor vehicle access outside schools is restricted at pick-up and drop-off times. This paper presents a methodological case study illustrating how these methods can be applied in practice. We intended to use systems methods across our evaluation; here we describe how we use these methods to build theory. Following the five-step approach outlined by Alvarado et al., (2023), we produced research propositions, systems archetypes and a causal loop diagram to understand the underlying system in which traffic restriction schemes are implemented and their potential impact on school-based active travel.</p> Results <p>In bringing together diverse and multi-disciplinary evidence from different stakeholders we identified unanticipated systems interactions such as increased initial tensions and conflicts between users of different active travel modes (e.g. cyclists vs pedestrians). Using causal loop diagrams and systems archetypes, we developed research propositions focused on funding and implementation, safety, habit formation and the potential for unintended consequences.</p> Conclusions <p>Taking a complex systems approach has deepened our understanding of how traffic restriction schemes interact with their broader context and helped us develop a guiding theoretical framework for our ongoing evaluation. We intend this work to stimulate discussion, offer insights for future evaluations of population-level health interventions, and encourage public health researchers to adopt systems methods in their own evaluations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Applying a complex systems-informed approach to population health interventions: a methodological case-study example of traffic restriction schemes outside schools

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月21日

查看全文
  • Olivia Alliott,
  • David Ogilvie,
  • Lucy Anderson,
  • Richard Patterson,
  • Kate Garrott,
  • Emma Carey,
  • Cornelia Guell,
  • Jenna Panter

摘要

Background

Population health interventions may change physical, social or fiscal environments to shift health behaviours and often operate within a complex system of interacting factors. Systems methods are frequently suggested as a way to provide an overview of the interactions that determine behaviours or actions and may help to understand how or why interventions might (or might not) change health. However, there are few examples of how these methods have been used to guide empirical evaluations of public health interventions.

Methods

We describe our application of a qualitative complex systems approach within an ongoing evaluation of a population health intervention: traffic restriction schemes, often referred to as School Streets, where motor vehicle access outside schools is restricted at pick-up and drop-off times. This paper presents a methodological case study illustrating how these methods can be applied in practice. We intended to use systems methods across our evaluation; here we describe how we use these methods to build theory. Following the five-step approach outlined by Alvarado et al., (2023), we produced research propositions, systems archetypes and a causal loop diagram to understand the underlying system in which traffic restriction schemes are implemented and their potential impact on school-based active travel.

Results

In bringing together diverse and multi-disciplinary evidence from different stakeholders we identified unanticipated systems interactions such as increased initial tensions and conflicts between users of different active travel modes (e.g. cyclists vs pedestrians). Using causal loop diagrams and systems archetypes, we developed research propositions focused on funding and implementation, safety, habit formation and the potential for unintended consequences.

Conclusions

Taking a complex systems approach has deepened our understanding of how traffic restriction schemes interact with their broader context and helped us develop a guiding theoretical framework for our ongoing evaluation. We intend this work to stimulate discussion, offer insights for future evaluations of population-level health interventions, and encourage public health researchers to adopt systems methods in their own evaluations.