Article Data

  • Views 461
  • Dowloads 143

Review

Open Access

Theories, models and frameworks in men's health studies: A scoping review

  • Khalid Ashraf1
  • Chirk Jenn Ng1
  • Kim Leng Goh2

1Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

2Department of Applied Statistics, Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

DOI: 10.31083/jomh.2021.006 Vol.17,Issue 2,April 2021 pp.15-24

Published: 08 April 2021

*Corresponding Author(s): Chirk Jenn Ng E-mail: ngcj@um.edu.my

PDF (238.38 kB)

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Men's health has been acknowledged as a broad field that comprises not only of male specific diseases, but involves widely differing disciplines. While a significant number of studies have looked into the definition of men's health, there is a lack of concerted attempts to collectively review the theories, models and frameworks in men's health studies. This paper presents an overview of theories, models and frameworks used in past men's health studies.

Material and Methods: A scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Publications were searched in three electronic databases. Two independent researchers performed publications' selection and data charting. Any disagreement was resolved by consultation with a third researcher.

Results: One hundred and forty publications were included in this review. Within these publications, 87 theories, models and frameworks were identified. They were found to be generic to either health sciences or social sciences, or specific to men's health. Three type of processes were observed among the theories, models and frameworks, namely, behavioural, cognitive and gender processes. The findings also indicated a lack of publications about theories, models and frameworks in men's health studies from developing countries and outside the western world.

Conclusion: The results revealed the multidisciplinary nature of men's health. However, due to the fragmentation of theoretical understanding by separate disciplines, an interdisciplinary approach is necessary for this field.

Keywords

Scoping review; Theories; Models; Frameworks; Men's health

Cite and Share

Khalid Ashraf,Chirk Jenn Ng,Kim Leng Goh. Theories, models and frameworks in men's health studies: A scoping review. Journal of Men's Health. 2021. 17(2);15-24.

References

[1] Wingard DL. The sex differential in morbidity, mortality, and lifestyle. Annual Review of Public Health. 1984; 5: 433-458.

[2] Lopez AD. The sex differential in mortality in developed countries. In Lopez AD, Ruzicka LT. (ed.) Sex differentials in mortality: trends, determinants and consequences (pp. 53-120). Canberra: Australian Nat. Univ. Press. 1983.

[3] Rajaratnam JK, Marcus JR, Levin-Rector A, Chalupka AN, Wang H, Dwyer L, et al. Worldwide mortality in men and women aged 15-59 years from 1970 to 2010: a systematic analysis. The Lancet. 2010; 375: 1704-1720.

[4] Wang H, Dwyer-Lindgren L, Lofgren KT, Rajaratnam JK, Marcus JR, Levin-Rector A, et al. Age-specific and sex-specific mortality in 187 countries, 1970-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet. 2012; 380: 2071-2094.

[5] Hawkes S, Buse K. Gender and global health: evidence, policy, and inconvenient truths. The Lancet. 2013; 381: 1783-1787.

[6] Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K, Adair-Rohani H, et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet. 2012; 380: 2224-2260.

[7] Krueger H, Goldenberg SL, Koot J, Andres E. Don’t change much: the economic impact of modest health behavior changes in middle-aged men. American Journal of Men’s Health. 2017; 11: 275-283.

[8] Brott A, Dougherty A, Williams ST, Matope JH, Fadich A, Taddelle M. The economic burden shouldered by public and private entities as a consequence of health disparities between men and women. American Journal of Men’s Health. 2011; 5: 528-539.

[9] White A. Men’s health: the challenges ahead. The Journal of Men’s Health and Gender. 2004; 1: 296-299.

[10] Fletcher R. Report on men’s health services. Prepared for NSW Depart-ment of Health by Men’s Health Advisory Group. 1997.

[11] Wilkins D, Baker P, editors. Getting it sorted: a policy programme for men’s health. London: Men’s Health Forum. 2004.

[12] Bardehle D, Dinges M, White A. What is men’s health? A definition. Journal of Men’s Health. 2017; 13: e40-e52.

[13] Noel R, Paula C. National men’s health policy 2008-2013 working with men in Ireland to achieve optimum health & wellbeing Reference Document. 2008.

[14] Bilsker D, Goldenberg L, Davison J. A roadmap to men’s health. Current Status, Research, Policy & Practice. 2010.

[15] Tan H, Ng C, Ho C, Teo C. Asian men’s health report. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Men’s Health Initiative. 2013.

[16] Lloyd T. Men’s health review. Working with Men. 1996.

[17] Van Belle S, van de Pas R, Marchal B. Towards an agenda for implementation science in global health: there is nothing more practical than good (social science) theories. British Medical Journal Global Health. 2017; 2: e000181.

[18] Bergeron K, Abdi S, DeCorby K, Mensah G, Rempel B, Manson H. Theories, models and frameworks used in capacity building interventions relevant to public health: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2017; 17: 914.

[19] Glanz K, Bishop DB. The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions. Annual Review of Public Health. 2010; 31: 399-418.

[20] Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological frame-work. International journal of social research methodology. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005; 8: 19-32.

[21] Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. annals of internal medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2018; 169: 467-473.

[22] Blaikie N. The role of theory. Designing social research: the logic of anticipation (pp. 125). 2nd ed. Polity. 2010.

[23] Booth A, Carroll C. Systematic searching for theory to inform systematic reviews: is it feasible? is it desirable? Health Information and Libraries Journal. 2015; 32: 220-235.

[24] World Population Review. Western Countries Population 2020. Available at: http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/western-countries/ (Accessed: 18 Feb 2020).

[25] World Bank. World Bank Country and Lending Groups 2020 Available at: https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups

[26] Noar SM, Zimmerman RS. Health behavior theory and cumulative knowledge regarding health behaviors: are we moving in the right direction? Health Education Research. 2005; 20: 275-290.

[27] Glanz K, Maddock J. On judging models and theories: research and practice, psychology and public health. Journal of Health Psychology. 2000; 5: 151-154.

[28] Horton R. North and South: bridging the information gap. The Lancet. 2000; 355: 2231-2236.

[29] Courtenay WH. Dying to be men: Psychosocial, environmental, and biobehavioral directions in promoting the health of men and boys. In: Courtenay W (ed.). New York: Routledge. 2011.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Social Sciences Citation Index Social Sciences Citation Index contains over 3,400 journals across 58 social sciences disciplines, as well as selected items from 3,500 of the world’s leading scientific and technical journals. More than 9.37 million records and 122 million cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in the social and behavioral sciences.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

SCOPUS Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

DOAJ DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals.

CrossRef Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. Crossref committed to open scholarly infrastructure and collaboration, this is now announcing a very deliberate path.

Portico Portico is a community-supported preservation archive that safeguards access to e-journals, e-books, and digital collections. Our unique, trusted process ensures that the content we preserve will remain accessible and usable for researchers, scholars, and students in the future.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

    Top