loading page

Planning matters: a document analysis of 24 Portuguese health programmes
  • +11
  • Soraia Costa,
  • Inês Morais Vilaça,
  • Daniela Lima,
  • Lara Pinheiro-Guedes,
  • Suzana Barbosa,
  • Sílvia Salvador,
  • Rachel Barbabela,
  • Ana Cristina Carvalho,
  • Paula Oliveira,
  • Ana Cecília Chaves,
  • Margarida Teixeira,
  • Diogo Caveiro,
  • Alexandre Vieira,
  • Teresa Leão
Soraia Costa
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Inês Morais Vilaça
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Daniela Lima
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Lara Pinheiro-Guedes
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Suzana Barbosa
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Sílvia Salvador
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Rachel Barbabela
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Ana Cristina Carvalho
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Paula Oliveira
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Ana Cecília Chaves
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Margarida Teixeira
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Diogo Caveiro
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Alexandre Vieira
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia
Author Profile
Teresa Leão
Universidade do Porto Unidade de Investigacao em Epidemiologia

Corresponding Author:teresa.leao@ispup.up.pt

Author Profile

Abstract

Background: Health planning is essential for effective public health interventions and optimal resource utilisation. The Portuguese General Directorate of Health has a long history of developing health plans and programmes, for communicable and noncommunicable diseases, and their determinants. This study aimed to review the current 24 programmes and assess the adequacy of their structure and content. Methods: A document analysis was conducted using a programme assessment matrix developed by the research group. Two independent researchers evaluated each programme, scoring items as ”absent,” ”present,” or ”not applicable.” A quantitative analysis was employed to analyse compliance scores between priority and non-priority programmes and across the year of publication. Results: Of the 24 existing programmes, 16 complied with at least 75% of the predefined items. Priority programmes had an 83% global compliance score, surpassing non-priority programmes (with 33% of compliance). While the healthy eating programme achieved 100% compliance, the programme on sexual and reproductive scored the lowest (19%). The item least commonly present was “updated time scope”, in only 21% of the programmes. Most recently published programmes were more likely to have a higher compliance score (Β = 0.76, 95% CI: [0.46, 1.05]). Not all programmes were publicly available in the same digital location. Conclusions: There was heterogeneity in the 24 health promotion programmes in terms of structure, content, timeliness, and accessibility. A standardised structure could enhance their quality and ease their interpretation and dissemination.
11 Jul 2024Submitted to International Journal of Health Planning and Management
16 Jul 2024Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
16 Jul 2024Submission Checks Completed
16 Jul 2024Assigned to Editor
18 Jul 2024Reviewer(s) Assigned
08 Oct 2024Editorial Decision: Revise Major