Search

Issue addressed: Wellbeing SA, an independent South Australian government agency, developed a Wellbeing Index for South Australia across a 12‐month period in 2021–2022 to enable the measurement of wellbeing outcomes for the state. Methods: The development of the Index was a methodical process based on two key emphases—evidence‐based action and working in partnership. The steps included a scoping of existing wellbeing measurement frameworks and then working with a broad range of partner agencies to define the purpose, scope and structure for the Index and subsequently the content (indicators, their measures and the most robust data available). Results: A Wellbeing Index for South Australia was launched in June 2022 on the Wellbeing SA website. It is structured against domains of physical, mental, social/community, Aboriginal cultural wellbeing and the underpinning determinants of wellbeing. Conclusions: The Index communicates the importance and the breadth of wellbeing outcomes addressed by the various health promotion and policy actors in South Australia and provides a sound basis for monitoring the wellbeing of the community over time. So what?: Measuring wellbeing is identified by proponents of a Wellbeing Economy as one useful mechanism, alongside legislation, policy and funding, for shaping a broader definition of a successful society. The health promotion community, and their partners, have a role to play in promoting the importance of a broad definition of wellbeing, and in identifying robust and meaningful indicators. This paper offers other jurisdictions insights into the process used, and challenges encountered, in creating the Index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issue addressed: The objective was to identify whether National Sporting Organisations (NSOs) have policy documentation on healthy behaviours (smokefree, sun‐protection, healthy food/beverages and alcohol) and, for organisations with such documentation, whether this was in‐line with current scientific evidence of past best practice in cancer prevention. Methods: This cross‐sectional policy analysis study was performed September to December 2018 in Aotearoa/New Zealand. A content analysis was undertaken using NSO policy documents matched against a framework of key indicators for best practice within health behaviours of interest. Data analysis of the policy process was undertaken through key informant telephone interviews with NSO staff using semi‐structured qualitative interviews. Results: Of 96 NSOs, nearly half (49%) mentioned smokefree at least once in one of their policy documents, and 47% had an alcohol policy, although in both instances the policies lacked comprehensiveness. Two NSOs had a reasonably comprehensive sun protection policy. Seventeen had at least one specific nutrition policy/guideline. The contents of the latter were primarily related to short‐term athletic performance rather than non‐communicable disease prevention, specifically promoting hydration during sports participation, and food and nutrition to support sporting performance. Two NSOs had policies relating to the promotion of healthy food/nutrition more widely. For some NSOs, the lack of health‐related policies was not a conscious choice but just not considered previously. Other NSOs reported they lacked resources or had other priorities. Conclusions: Although this study clearly demonstrates that many NSOs lack adequate health‐related policies, this is not necessarily a conscious choice, but the result of a lack of resources, other priorities, or just that they had not considered developing policies in these areas. A number expressed support for these types of policies although it was apparent that some, particularly smaller NSOs, would require assistance in policy template development. It seems probable that the development of health‐related policies will only occur if partner agencies become involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issue addressed: Health promotion resources in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) languages are being widely translated and disseminated at the community, health service and government level. In addition to outlining the relevant Australian policy context and evidence base, this study sought to describe the availability and characteristics of COVID‐19 and maternal health promotion resources incorporating Indigenous languages. Methods: Health promotion resources published online between June 2005 and June 2020 were identified by a desktop scan and screened against quality inclusion criteria. A content analysis by resource type, health topic, purpose, use of language and source was conducted. Results: A total of 215 resources was eligible for inclusion, incorporating 50 different Indigenous languages and representing a varied approach to language use and health promotion. Almost 7 times as many COVID‐19 resources were identified than maternal health materials. Conclusions: In contrast to maternal health, COVID‐19 has seen a sharp rise in the number of health promotion resources produced in language, especially in formats capable of streamlined replication in multiple languages. Strong use of narrative, storytelling and alternative primary aims such as language education suggests potential for greater collaboration between health promotion organisations and other community groups and services. Bilingual resources may have applications for communities where traditional language knowledge is being reawakened. So what?: Emerging capacity to efficiently produce health promotion resources in multiple Indigenous languages could be capitalised for health topics beyond COVID‐19. However, further research in determining best practice and user perspectives is essential in guiding the development of these resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]