Table 4 |
||
|
Australian physical activity policy development reviewed against HARDWIRED criteria and from an international perspective |
||
|
HARDWIRED Criteria for National Policy |
Countries studied in International Review |
Australia |
|
|
||
|
Highly consultative in development; |
++++ |
+++ |
|
Active through multi-strategic, multi-level, partnerships; |
+++ |
+++ |
|
Resourced adequately; |
++ |
+ |
|
Developed in stand-alone and synergistic policy modes; |
+++ |
++ |
|
Widely communicated; |
+++ |
+++ |
|
Independently evaluated; |
0 |
0 |
|
Role-clarified and performance-delineated; |
+ |
++ |
|
Evidence-informed and Evidence-generating; and |
+++ |
++ |
|
Defined national guidelines for health enhancing physical activity. |
+++ |
++++ |
|
|
||
|
KEY ++++ = Substantially achieved +++ = Partially achieved ++ = Partial progress + = Little progress 0 = No progress |
||
|
Bellew et al. Australia and New Zealand Health Policy 2008 5:18 doi:10.1186/1743-8462-5-18 |
||
