Key result
Face-to-face canvassing and drop-in sessions overcome barriers to engaging disadvantaged individuals in CHD primary prevention.
Why the study?
Interventions that fail to recruit socio-economically disadvantaged populations may widen health inequalities in CHD primary prevention.
Does face-to-face canvassing improve engagement in CHD primary prevention screening compared to a social marketing campaign in socio-economically disadvantaged populations?
Population
Socio-economically disadvantaged individuals eligible for CHD primary prevention risk screening in Have a Heart Paisley programme
Comparison
Face-to-face canvassing and community development project vs social marketing campaign
Design
Qualitative study using focus group discussions
Authors
Loading...
Community outreach may boost CHD prevention engagement in disadvantaged groups; leaves open comparative effectiveness versus campaigns in trials.
Does face-to-face canvassing improve engagement in CHD primary prevention screening compared to a social marketing campaign in socio-economically disadvantaged populations?
Engaging socio-economically disadvantaged populations in CHD prevention requires tailored strategies like face-to-face canvassing rather than population-wide postal campaigns.
Harkins et al. (2010) studied Coronary heart disease (primary prevention) (n=13). Face-to-face canvassing (community development project) vs. Social marketing campaign (mass mailing) was evaluated on Perceived barriers and facilitators to engaging in CHD primary prevention. Face-to-face canvassing and flexible community-based drop-in sessions successfully overcame barriers to engaging socio-economically disadvantaged individuals in CHD primary prevention.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: