4.5 Article

Beliefs about the causes and solutions to obesity: A comparison of GPs and lay people

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 71, 期 1, 页码 72-78

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.11.022

关键词

obesity; GPs' beliefs; lay beliefs; solutions; causes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To explore general practitioners (GPs') beliefs about the causes and solutions to obesity, to compare them to those held by a lay sample and to assess the role of beliefs about causes in explaining beliefs about solutions. Methods: Questionnaires regarding the causes and solutions to obesity were completed by GPs (n = 73) and a lay sample (n = 311). Results: GPs generally believe that obesity is caused by psychological and behavioural factors and are ambivalent about the effectiveness of the majority of available solutions. When compared to a lay population, GPs show a greater endorsement of behavioural, structural, social and psychological causes of obesity whereas the lay population prefer a more biological model of causality. The present study also provides some evidence for the origins of such beliefs about solutions and indicates consistency between GPs' beliefs about solutions and causes. For example, GPs endorse a medical solution if they believe obesity is caused by biological factors and endorse policy change as a solution if they believe it is caused by social factors. The lay sample did not show such consistency in their beliefs. Conclusions: GPs believe that obesity does not belong within the medical domain. They hold a coherent model in terms of beliefs about causes and solutions which may limit their perspective on what constitutes a suitable solution to this ever common problem. Practice implications: If GPs are to take responsibility for the management of obesity they should be encouraged either to change their beliefs or to consider whether solutions need always address causality. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据