:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:民眾如何看待健康教育訊息:深度訪談嚼檳榔的計程車司機
書刊名:臺灣公共衛生雜誌
作者:郭淑珍丁志音陳怡君
作者(外文):Kuo, Shu-chenTing, Chih-yinChen, Yi-chun
出版日期:2005
卷期:24:3
頁次:頁239-253
主題關鍵詞:嚼檳榔計程車司機健康教育訊息常民知識Areca quid chewingTaxi driverHealth education informationLay knowledge
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(7) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:5
  • 共同引用共同引用:12
  • 點閱點閱:96
     目標:本研究探索嚼食檳榔的計程車司機,如何思考所接收到的檳榔相關健康訊息。 方法:研究者利用深度訪談的方式,自2003年1月至8月訪問了44位嚼檳榔的計程車司機。 結果:本研究大部分受訪司機,都曾由不同管道接觸檳榔危害的相關訊息,但是對於檳榔的健康危害,卻有更寬廣的看法。有些司機會從個人的健康狀況、體質與基因、是否實踐某些健康生活方式、是否做好口腔清潔工作等因素,以為檳榔危害的整體考量。有些司機認為自己是檳榔「專家」,他們認為只有嚼檳榔的「量」過多,或是嚼「錯」檳榔才會產生健康危害。少數司機認為生活中危害健康的因素無所不在,或是有比「健康」更重要的事情,所以檳榔的健康危害不足為道。 結論:嚼檳榔的計程車司機並非是無知者,需要更多、更好的檳榔危害知識。本研究訪談的司機將其所接收到檳榔相關訊息與其原本的健康知識、生活經驗相連,重新詮釋檳榔危害的訊息,並採取相關行動。公衛專家需由常民觀點思考健康訊息,才能與民眾對話,進一步達成改變的契機。
     Objectives: This study examined areca quid chewing taxi drivers' perspectives of areca quid related health information. Methods: Accompanied by an ex-taxi driver, the author visited one taxi driver for each interview at drivers' rest areas or waiting lines in Taipei. The interview conversation focused on the health effects of the behavior and the driver's thoughts. Results: A total of 44 areca quid chewing taxi drivers were interviewed in-depth between January and August 2003. Most taxi drivers received areca quid related health information from a variety of channels. However, they had very broad view of areca quid information. Some drivers identified their health status, constitution or genes, participation in a healthy lifestyle, and oral hygiene practices in determining the health risk of areca quid chewing. Some drivers considered themselves areca quid experts, and suggested that the health risk of areca quid was from an "overdose" or chewing the "wrong" kind of areca quid. A few drivers believed areca quid health information to be trivial. They said the hazardous environment and their daily survival were far more important than the health risk of chewing areca quid. Conclusions: Areca quid chewing taxi drivers are not uneducated individuals who require more or better areca quid health information. They integrated areca quid information with their own personal health knowledge and their daily experience, reinterpreted areca quid information, and took action. In order to communicate with the public and to change health behavior, public health experts need to recognize the significance of lay knowledge.
期刊論文
1.楊奕馨、陳鴻榮、曾筑瑄、謝天渝(20021000)。臺灣地區各縣市檳榔嚼食率調查報告。臺灣口腔醫學衛生科學雜誌,18(1),1-16。  延伸查詢new window
2.李蘭、林慧宜、晏涵文(19980300)。預防國中生嚼檳榔之教育效果。醫學教育,2(1),49-64。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.葛梅貞、李蘭、蕭朱杏(19991000)。傳播管道與健康行為之關係研究:以嚼檳榔為例。中華公共衛生雜誌,18(5),349-362。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.Ko, Y. C.、Huang, Y. L.、Lee, C. H.、Chen, M. J.、Lin, L. M.、Tsai, C. C.(1995)。Betel quid chewing, cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption related to oral cancer in Taiwan。Journal of Oral Pathology and Medicine,24(10),450-453。  new window
5.Ko, Ying-Chin、Chiang, Tai-An、Chang, Shun-Jen、Hsieh, Shu-Feng(1992)。Prevalence of betel quid chewing habit in Taiwan and related sociodemographic factors。Journal of Oral Pathology and Medicine,21(6),261-264。  new window
6.李蘭(19921200)。嚼檳榔預防教育先驅研究(1):國中生嚼檳榔現況及影響因素之初探。中華民國公共衛生學會雜誌,11(4),285-294。  延伸查詢new window
7.李蘭、劉潔心、晏涵文、陳麗鳳(1992)。嚼檳榔預防教育先驅研究(II)--國中生嚼檳榔預防教學實驗。中華公共衛生雜誌,11(4),295-303。  延伸查詢new window
8.林易超、柯政全、謝天渝(2000)。檳榔及其添加物致突變性之研究。臺灣口腔醫學會雜誌,16(1),273-295。  延伸查詢new window
9.楊瑪利(1992)。檳榔文化-文明與原始的矛盾。天下雜誌,128,26-36。  延伸查詢new window
10.Lee, Renée Gravois、Garvin, Theresa(2003)。Moving from Information Transfer to Information Exchange in Health and Health Care。Social Science & Medicine,56(3),449-464。  new window
11.Davison, Charlie、Smith, George Davey、Frankel, Stephen(1991)。Lay Epidemiology and the Prevention Paradox: The Implications of Coronary Candidacy for Health Education。Sociology of Health & Illness,13(1),1-19。  new window
12.Xu, K. Tom(2002)。Compensating Behaviors, Regret, and Heterogeneity in the Dynamics of Smoking Behavior。Social Science & Medicine,54(1),133-146。  new window
13.Mercado-Martinez, Francisco J.、Ramos-Herrera, Igor Martin(2002)。Diabetes: The Layperson's Theories of Causality。Qualitative Health Research,12(6),792-806。  new window
14.Lawlor, Debbie A.、Frankel, Stephen、Shaw, Mary、Ebrahim, Shah、Davey, Smith George(2003)。Smoking and Ill Health: Does Lay Epidemiology Explain the Failure of Smoking Cessation Programs Among Deprived Populations?。American Journal of Public Health,93(2),266-270。  new window
15.Lindbladh, Eva、Lyttkens, Carl Hampus(2002)。Habit versus Choice: The Process of Decision-making in Health-related Behaviour。Social Science & Medicine,55(3),451-465。  new window
16.Sorensen, Glorian、Barbeau, Elizabeth、Hunt, Mary Kay、Emmons, Karen(2004)。Reducing Social Disparities in Tobacco Use: A Social-contextual Model for Reducing Tobacco Use Among Blue-collar Workers。American Journal of Public Health,94(2),230-239。  new window
17.Popay, Jennie、Williams, Gareth(1996)。Public Health Research and Lay Knowledge。Social Science & Medicine,42(5),759-768。  new window
18.Eakin, Joan、Robertson, Ann、Poland, Blake、Coburn, David、Edwards, Richard(1996)。Towards a Critical Social Science Perspective on Health Promotion Research。Health Promotion International,11(2),157-165。  new window
19.Milburn, Kathryn(1996)。The Importance of Lay Theorising for Health Promotion Research and Practice。Health Promotion International,11(1),41-46。  new window
學位論文
1.王淑貞(2001)。體力勞動工作與嚼食檳榔行為之研究:以嘉義縣市與雲林縣地區為例(碩士論文)。國立中正大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.行政院衛生署(1993)。衛生白皮書。臺北:行政院衛生署。  延伸查詢new window
2.Rubin, H. J.、Rubin, I. S.(1995)。Qualitative Interviewing: the Art of Hearing Data。Sage Publications。  new window
3.行政院衛生署(1996)。中華民國公共衛生概況。臺北:行政院衛生署。  延伸查詢new window
4.蔡鵬飛(2000)。臺灣地區嚼食檳榔風俗近況與牙醫界的對策。檳榔的健康危害。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
5.鄭景暉(2000)。檳榔嚼塊的化學致癌性質暨其防制:現況與未來。論壇健康促進與疾病預防委員會文獻回顧研析計董:「檳榔與口腔癌」。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
6.郭彥彬(2000)。嚼檳榔與口腔癌癌基因、抑癌基因的突變和表現。論壇健康促進與疾病預防委員會文獻回顧研析計董:「檳榔與口腔癌」。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
7.(2000)。檳榔的健康危害。檳榔的健康危害。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
8.行政院衛生署(2000)。口腔檳榔癌。口腔檳榔癌。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
9.Tannahill, Andrew(1992)。Epidemiology and Health Promotion: A Common Understanding。Health Promotion: Disciplines and Diversity。London, UK。  new window
10.Freire, Paulo(1986)。Pedagogy of the Oppressed。Pedagogy of the Oppressed。New York, NY。  new window
圖書論文
1.Cockerham, William C.(2000)。The Sociology of Health Behavior and Health Lifestyles。Handbook of Medical Sociology。New Jersey:Prentice-Hall。  new window
2.胡幼慧、姚美華(1996)。一些質性方法上的思考:信度與效度?如何抽樣?如何收集資料、登錄與分析?。質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。巨流圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top