Compare models of health and evaluate the effectiveness of health promotion approaches

What this dot point is asking

This dot point asks you to compare the major models of health, especially the biomedical and social models, and to evaluate different health promotion approaches. You need to weigh strengths and limitations and judge what makes a strategy effective for a given population and issue.

The biomedical model

The biomedical model views health as the absence of disease and concentrates on the body, diagnosis, treatment and cure. It is delivered largely by health professionals in clinical settings and has driven major advances such as vaccines, surgery and medication. Its strengths are rapid technical progress and effective treatment of acute conditions. Its limitations are that it can be costly, can focus on illness rather than prevention, and can overlook the social and environmental causes of poor health.

The social model

The social model of health responds to those limitations. It addresses the broader determinants of health, emphasises prevention, promotes equity and access, encourages community participation, and supports intersectoral action across government and society. Rather than asking only how to treat disease, it asks why some groups become sick more often and how the conditions producing illness can be changed.

Approaches to health promotion

Within these models, several practical approaches are used. Knowing their strengths helps you evaluate.

• Health education and information: building knowledge and skills, for example sun safety lessons. Useful but often weak on its own because knowledge does not always change behaviour.
• Social marketing: using advertising techniques to shift attitudes and behaviour, such as anti smoking campaigns. Reaches large audiences but can be costly and may not reach the most disadvantaged.
• Regulation and legislation: laws and rules such as mandatory bicycle helmets or alcohol limits. Powerful and population wide, but can face political resistance.
• Screening and early detection: programs such as cancer screening that find disease early. Effective for some conditions but raises questions of access and equity.
• Community development: communities identify and act on their own priorities. Builds capacity and ownership but can be slow.

Judging effectiveness

To evaluate a strategy, ask a consistent set of questions. Does it address the underlying determinants or only the symptoms. Does it reach the groups with the greatest need, supporting equity. Does it combine several approaches and action areas. Is there evidence of measurable change, such as a fall in disease rates or risk behaviour. Is it sustainable and affordable over time. A strategy that scores well across these tests is more likely to be effective than one relying on a single approach.

Equity as a measure of success

A central idea in Health Studies is that good health promotion narrows the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged groups. A campaign that improves average health but widens inequity, because it mainly reaches those already well off, is a weaker result. When you evaluate, always check whether benefits reach priority populations such as people in rural areas, low income households and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Applying this in assessment

In responses, define the model or approach, give a clear example, then evaluate using the criteria above. Comparison questions reward balanced judgement: state the strength, state the limitation, and reach a reasoned conclusion about which approach or combination best suits the issue and population in the scenario.

Understanding these models and approaches lets you evaluate any campaign or policy you meet later in the course and explain why some strategies achieve lasting, equitable improvement while others do not.