IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

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

Listed author(s):
  • Buzzard, Shirley
Registered author(s):

    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.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 19 (1984)
    Issue (Month): 3 (January)
    Pages: 273-277

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:19:y:1984:i:3:p:273-277
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    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)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.