IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v19y1984i3p273-277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Appropriate research for primary health care: An anthropologist's view

Author

Listed:
  • Buzzard, Shirley

Abstract

In Primary Health Care (PHC) projects, it has become customary to conduct all-purpose surveys early in the project. These are usually based on questionnaires administered to a relatively large sample of the population and elicit information on demography, living conditions, health status, sanitary facilities and socio-economic attributes of the population, in addition to providing baseline data on the indicators of program success. It is recommended that a distinction be made between different types of data collection efforts and that consideration be given to the timing of such surveys so as not to raise community expectations. Early in the project a survey of demographic characteristics and health indicators may be appropriate. However, major surveys of living conditions and health problems are better delayed until the program is in operation and such surveys can be used as mechanisms for community participation, motivation and education. The limitations on the use of questionnaires is discussed. Because anthropological methods are more suited to the skills of health promoters and yield valuable behavioral data, it is suggested that anthropologists encourage the use of these alternatives to questionnaires. The use of participant-observation, life stories, interviews, mapping and essays are discussed in the context of PHC programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Buzzard, Shirley, 1984. "Appropriate research for primary health care: An anthropologist's view," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 273-277, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:19:y:1984:i:3:p:273-277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(84)90218-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:19:y:1984:i:3:p:273-277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.