Since Aaron Antonovsky’s salutogenesis theory and Morgan and Ziglio’s health assets model were first proposed, there has been a growing concern to define the resources available to the individual and the community to maintain or improve health and well-being. The aim of the present study was to identify the dimensions that characterise community assets for health. To this end, we conducted a systematised review with a meta-synthesis and content analysis of research or projects involving asset mapping in the community. Articles that met our eligibility criteria were: (1) based on the salutogenic approach and (2) described an assets mapping process and among their results, explained what, how and why particular community assets for health had been selected. The search included primary studies in the published and grey literature which were selected from websites and electronic databases (Web of Science, MEDLINE, Scopus, EBSCOhost, Dialnet, SciELO). Of the 607 records examined by a single reviewer, 34 were included in the content analysis and 14 in the qualitative synthesis. Using an inductive process, we identified 14 dimensions with 24 categories, for which in-depth literature reviews were then carried out to define specific indicators and items. These dimensions were: utility, intention, previous use, accessibility (“circumstances–opportunity–affordability”), proximity-walkability, connectivity, intelligibility (visibility, transparency), identity (uniqueness, appropriability, attachment), design (configuration, functionality, comfort), safety (objective/subjective), diversity, the dimension of public and private, and sustainability (which includes maintenance, profitability or economic sustainability, environmental sustainability, centrality-participation and equity-inclusiveness).

To describe the functioning and regulations of health councils in La Rioja (Spain) as vehicles for citizen participation in health management. A qualitative analysis was conducted triangulating the national and regional institutional framework reviews of health councils, the official minutes of 58 meetings, and 11 semi-structured interviews with related persons. The analysis revealed a predominantly biomedical-technological standpoint, a lack of training in community participation dynamics, and an absence of structure in council operations. The councils were also found to be over-powered by public healthcare administration and restricted to a role of simply transmitting information, thereby neglecting an opportunity for proactive community involvement. In spite of these shortcomings, community health councils can operate as efficient instruments in health management as long as the necessary political will and appropriate community awareness both exist.

The salutogenesis theory of Aaron Antonovsky and the Health Assets Model of Morgan and Ziglio have given rise to a notable interest in defining the resources available to individuals and the community to maintain or improve their health and well-being. The present study began by identifying the universal dimensions of Community Assets for Health, and then analyzed and validated an assessment scale following the Delphi method. A high degree of consensus was achieved among 13 experts from different disciplines. The results of the content analysis and statistical analysis led to a reconfiguring of an instrument that is so far unique in its approach. It is composed of 103 items across 14 dimensions (utility, intention, previous use, affordability, proximity, walkability, connectivity, intelligibility, identity, design, safety, diversity, public dimension, and sustainability).