Social marketing leverage for heart health: The Ekaterinburg experience

CVD Prevention and Control

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 61-68

  Nishtar, Sania ^a   Alderson, Helen ^b   Grizeau Clemens, Danielle ^b   Shalnova, Svetlana Anatolievna ^c   Kolotova, Galina ^d  

^a Heartfile Pakistan   (Pakistan)

^b WORLD HEART FEDERATION   (Switzerland)

^c Russian society of Cardiology   (Russian Federation)

^d Ekaterinburg City   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Awareness; Cardiovascular disease; Community intervention; Healthy lifestyles; Media campaign; Prevention; Risk factors; Russian federation; Social marketing

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CARDIOLOGY; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH HAZARD; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MORTALITY; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRETEST POSTTEST DESIGN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUASI EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; RUSSIAN FEDERATION; SOCIAL MARKETING;

EID: 47049131751     PISSN: 18754570     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.precon.2007.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. World Health Organization, Preventing chronic disease, a vital investment, 2005.
2. World Health Organization. NCD infobase (2001 figures). Now WHO Global Infobase. [accessed 16.12.2006].
3. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. Highlights on health in the Russian Federation. Copenhagen, 1999.
4. World Health Organization. NCD Infobase Central Statistical Office, survey population: Moscow.
5. Ekaterinburg Travel. [accessed 16.12.2006].
6. Gross rating points (GRPs) measure the total volume of delivery of a message to the target audience. It is equal to the percent each to the target audience times the frequency of exposure.
7. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. CINDI Health Monitor: a study of feasibility of a health behaviour monitoring survey across CINDI countries: Data book. Annex 3: Methodology for a health behaviour survey. Copenhagen, 2003. [accessed 16.12.2006].
8. National Public Health Institute (KTL), Finland. FINBALT Health monitor, 40 questions. Helsinki, 2003.
9. Hox J., and De Leeuw E.D. A comparison of non response in mail, telephone and face to face surveys. Qual Quant 28 (1994) 4329-4344
10. Stanford University. Social science researcher proposes overhaul of survey methodology. News Release. September 27, 2006.
11. Schartz R., Smith C., Speers M.A., Dusenbur L.J., Bright F., Hedlund S., et al. Capacity building and resource needs of state health agencies to implement community-based cardiovascular disease programs. J Public Health Policy 14 (1993) 480-493
12. Bratch N., Finnegan J.R., Rissel C., Weisbrod R., Gleason J., Corbett J., et al. Community ownership and program continuation following a health demonstration project. Health Educ Res 9 (1994) 243-255
13. Swerissen H., and Crisp B. The sustainability of health promotion interventions for different levels of social organization. Health Promot Int 19 (2004) 1123-1130
14. Puska P., et al. The North Karelia project (1995), National Public Health Institute (KTL), Helsinki