Formation of family health through the implementation of priority functions of the population

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

The physical condition, the factors of the population’s existence, model the well-being of the basic cell of society, where its members perform certain roles.

OBJECTIVE: To study the process of forming family health through the implementation of priority functions of the population in a developing society.

METHODS: We studied the data of statistical accounting forms on the physiometric indicators of persons aged 5–70 years, questionnaires of the contingent from 18 to 70 years of the city of Novosibirsk. Theoretical reflection, qualitative content analysis, and interdisciplinary methods (assessment of physical condition, Student’s criterion, Pearson’s χ2, comparative analysis of the point of view of the 18–70-year-old population about the priority of activity) are used to create an algorithm of actions.

RESULTS: The main roles were developed taking into account the anatomical and value characteristics of respondents aged 5–70 years. The main, important functions, the increased degree of their execution are established. The younger (from 18 to 29 years) the adult population, the need for reproductive and sexual opportunities is higher (36.4–42.6%). In persons aged 30–44 and 45–59, respectively, only educational and educational activities (46.8-56.4%) and household activities (38.0–38.9%) were highly significant. Psychoemotional (37.0%) and economic (35.7%) functions were performed by the population aged 60–70. Models were created through an increased degree of performance of the roles of respondents from 18 to 70 years old. For a contingent of 18–44 years old, a well-maintained life is necessary. The older (45–59 years) and older (60–70 years) generations are not dependent on the comfort of housing. At the same time, respondents from 18 to 70 years of age require the absence of harmful working conditions. At the same time, a balanced, irrational diet was observed in individuals aged 18–29 and 30–59, respectively. Whereas, for the contingent over 60 years old, the presence/ absence of rationality in the composition of dishes is not important.

CONCLUSIONS: The population, through its age-related priority functions, interacts with social institutions (health care system, economy-production, education), forms the health of the family, strengthens the national security of the country in the situation of modernization of medical structures.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Vera A. Pogodina

Novosibirsk Medical College

Author for correspondence.
Email: vera-pogodina@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1738-3859
SPIN-code: 6212-0975
Scopus Author ID: 410270

Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Novosibirsk

Anastasia V. Polovnikova

City Clinical Polyclinic N 1, Novosibirsk

Email: vera-pogodina@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4194-617X
SPIN-code: 2828-2952
Russian Federation, Novosibirsk

References

  1. Antonov AI, Medkov VM. Sotsiologiya sem’i. Moscow: MGU, Mezhdunarodnyi universitet biznesa i upravleniya («Brat’ya Karich»); 1996. (In Russ).
  2. Afanas’ev VV. Sotsial’nye instituty: Uchebnoe posobie dlya studentov sotsiologov, politologov i ekonomistov. Moscow: Knizhnyi dom - Universitet; 2016. (In Russ).
  3. Vorontsov IM, Mazurin AV. Propedevtika detskikh boleznei: Uchebnoe posobie. Saint Petersburg: Foliant; 2009. (In Russ).
  4. Zaitsev MV, Liflyandskii VG, Marinkin VI. Prikladnaya meditsinskaya statistika. Saint Petersburg: Foliant; 2003. (In Russ).
  5. Il’enkov EV. Dialekticheskaya logika. Moscow: Politizdat; 1984. (In Russ).
  6. Mezhdunarodnaya statisticheskaya klassifikatsiya boleznei i problem, svyazannykh so zdorov’em. Desyatyi peresmotr. Moscow: Meditsina; 1995. (In Russ).
  7. Pogodina VA, Babenko AI, Babenko EA, Polovnikova AV. The indices of complex assessment of health of individuals of middle age (30–40 years). Health Care Of The Russian Federation. 2018;62(2):106–110. (In Russ). doi: 10.18821/0044-197Kh-2018-62-2-106-110
  8. Polyarush A. The Dialectical Method of Education as Overcoming the Conceptual Contradictions of Education in Modern Russia. Bulletin of Science and Practice. 2019;5(8):187–191. (In Russ). doi: 10.33619/2414-2948/45/20
  9. Shapovalenko IV. Psikhologiya razvitiya i vozrastnaya psikhologiya: Uchebnik i praktikum dlya akademicheskogo bakalavriata. Moscow: Yurayt; 2019. (In Russ).
  10. Barnes MD, Hanson CL, Novilla LB, et al. Family-Centered Health Promotion: Perspectives for Engaging Families and Achieving Better Health Outcomes. Inquiry. 2020;57:46958020923537. doi: 10.1177/0046958020923537
  11. Bowman MA, Lucan SC, Rosenthal TC, et al. Family Medicine Research in the United States From the late 1960s Into the Future. Fam Med. 2017;49(4):289–295. PMC5407380
  12. Bowman MA, Neale AV. Investigating patient-centered care. J Am Board Fam Med. 2014;27(2):169–171. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2014.02.140009
  13. Bowman MA, Seehusen DA, Victoria Neale A. Interventions Must Be Realistic to Be Useful and Completed in Family Medicine. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31(1):1–4. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2018.01.170422
  14. Cheng Y, Zhang L, Wang F, et al. The effects of family structure and function on mental health during China’s transition: a cross-sectional analysis. BMC Fam Pract. 2017;18(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12875-017-0630-4
  15. Gotler RS. Unfinished Business: The Role of Research in Family Medicine. Ann Fam Med. 2019;17(1):70–76. doi: 10.1370/afm.2323
  16. Green ME, Weir E, Hogg W, et al. Improving collaboration between public health and family health teams in Ontario. Healthc Policy. 2013;8(3):e93–104. PMC3999554
  17. Jager J, Bornstein MH, Putnick DL, Hendricks C. Family members’ unique perspectives of the family: examining their scope, size, and relations to individual adjustment. J Fam Psychol. 2012;26(3):400–410. doi: 10.1037/a0028330
  18. Jager J, Yuen CX, Bornstein MH, et al. The relations of family members’ unique and shared perspectives of family dysfunction to dyad adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology. 2014;28(3):407–414. doi: 10.1037/a0036809
  19. Knight C. 2020 National Residency Match Program Results: Where Does Family Medicine Stand and What’s Next? Am Fam Physician. 2020;102(4):202–204.
  20. Lerner J. Wanting family medicine without primary care. Canadian Family Physician. 2018;64(2):155–156.
  21. Lindemann H. Why families matter. Pediatrics. 2014;134 Suppl 2:S97–103. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-1394E
  22. Lopez-Valcarcel BG. Family medicine in the crossroad. Risks and challenges. Aten Primaria. 2020;52(2):65–66. doi: 10.1016/j.aprim.2019.12.003
  23. Rodriguez-Sanchez E, Perez-Penaranda A, Losada-Baltar A, et al. Relationships between quality of life and family function in caregiver. BMC Fam Pract. 2011;12:19. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-12-19
  24. Sabzwari SR. The case for family medicine in Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc. 2015;65(6):660–664.
  25. Seltzer JA. Family Change and Changing Family Demography. Demography. 2019;56(2):405–426. doi: 10.1007/s13524-019-00766-6
  26. Shamali M, Konradsen H, Stas L, Ostergaard B. Dyadic effects of perceived social support on family health and family functioning in patients with heart failure and their nearest relatives: Using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Model. PLoS One. 2019;14(6):e0217970. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0217970
  27. Young RA, Sundermeyer RL. Family Medicine and Obstetrics: Let’s Stop Pretending. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31(3):328-331. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2018.03.180087

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. Fig. 1. Model of formation of family health based on the age-related priority functions of the population. Hereafter: APF ― age-related priority functions; RMA ― rapid medical assessment; CH ― children’s health; HA ― health of adults; CSQMPC ― criteria for satisfaction with the quality of medical and preventive care

Download (235KB)
2. Fig. 2. A family-based model for the development of children’s health that takes into consideration age-related priority functions. *Model not fully developed.

Download (192KB)
3. Fig. 3. A model for adult family member formation that takes into account the many sorts of age-related priority functions.

Download (184KB)
4. Fig. 4. A model for establishing living conditions for family members based on the type of age-related priority functions.

Download (266KB)
5. Fig. 5. A model for the construction of family members’ lifestyles that considers the type of age-related priority functions.

Download (278KB)
6. Fig. 6. A model for the formation of CSQMPC of the family members, taking into account the type of age-related priority functions.

Download (286KB)
7. Fig. 7. Classifier of family types, taking into account age-related priority functions.

Download (206KB)

Copyright (c) 2021 Eco-Vector



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № 77 - 12391 от 19.04.2002 г. 
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия
ЭЛ № ФС 77 - 80649 от 15.03.2021 г.



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies