Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy

Background In November 2008, the Secretary of State for Health (England) commissioned an independent review to propose effective strategies for reducing health inequalities. Review task groups were given just 3 months to make preliminary evidence-based recommendations. In this paper, we describe the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of public health (Oxford, England) England), 2010-12, Vol.32 (4), p.496-505
Hauptverfasser: Bambra, Clare, Joyce, Kerry E., Bellis, Mark A., Greatley, Angela, Greengross, Sally, Hughes, Sara, Lincoln, Paul, Lobstein, Tim, Naylor, Chris, Salay, Rebecca, Wiseman, Martin, Maryon-Davis, Alan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 505
container_issue 4
container_start_page 496
container_title Journal of public health (Oxford, England)
container_volume 32
creator Bambra, Clare
Joyce, Kerry E.
Bellis, Mark A.
Greatley, Angela
Greengross, Sally
Hughes, Sara
Lincoln, Paul
Lobstein, Tim
Naylor, Chris
Salay, Rebecca
Wiseman, Martin
Maryon-Davis, Alan
description Background In November 2008, the Secretary of State for Health (England) commissioned an independent review to propose effective strategies for reducing health inequalities. Review task groups were given just 3 months to make preliminary evidence-based recommendations. In this paper, we describe the methodology used, and the recommendations made, by the group tasked with inequalities in priority public health conditions. Methods A series of rapid literature reviews of the policy-relevant international evidence base was undertaken. Quantitative studies of any design, which looked at the effects on health inequalities, the social gradient or overall population health effects, of interventions designed to address the social determinants of selected public health priority conditions were examined. Recommendations were distilled using a Delphi approach. Results Five key policy proposals were made: reduce smoking in the most deprived groups; improve availability of and access to healthier food choices amongst low income groups; improve the early detection and treatment of diseases; introduce a minimum price per unit for alcohol and improve the links between physical and mental health care. Conclusion The combination of rapid review and Delphi distillation produced a shortlist of evidence-based recommendations within the allocated time frame. There was a dearth of robust evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions we examined: our proposals had to be based on extrapolation from general population health effects. Extensive, specific and robust evidence is urgently needed to guide policy and programmes. In the meantime, our methodology provides a reasonably sound and pragmatic basis for evidence-based policy-making.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/pubmed/fdq028
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_853207531</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45157973</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>45157973</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-77d8fafc3f39606f76c977aeac253a2ebf2570c92ff816bbe4791477d4cc9f0d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1v1DAQxS0EoqX0yBHkG6dQf8RxzA31g0VaCQmBVPViOfaYumTjrJ2U7p0_HFfpLkdOHvv95o01D6E3lHygRPGzce424M682xLWPkPHVNa04q0gzw91zY7Qq5zvCGGKEfESHTFScyFaeoz-fAM32zD8xLdg-ukWhwG2s-nDFCCXCx5TiClMO1wG9cHuMRsHV5g45I94zo_9yYzB4QT3AX7jKWIH99DHsRjEMWbTZ-xjwkV2MFioOpPB4TEWz91r9MIXAE6fzhP04-ry-_mqWn_9_OX807qyNeNTJaVrvfGWe64a0njZWCWlAWOZ4IZB55mQxCrmfUubroNaKlqXrtpa5YnjJ-j94lv-tJ0hT3oTsoW-NwPEOetWcEak4PT_JGWUM6XaQlYLaVPMOYHXZWMbk3aaEv2YkF4S0ktChX_35Lw87-l9JAV4uwB3eYrpoNeCCqkk_zcw5AkeDrpJv3QjuRR6dX2jxdV6dX3BLzTjfwH5e6qZ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>812132998</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Bambra, Clare ; Joyce, Kerry E. ; Bellis, Mark A. ; Greatley, Angela ; Greengross, Sally ; Hughes, Sara ; Lincoln, Paul ; Lobstein, Tim ; Naylor, Chris ; Salay, Rebecca ; Wiseman, Martin ; Maryon-Davis, Alan</creator><creatorcontrib>Bambra, Clare ; Joyce, Kerry E. ; Bellis, Mark A. ; Greatley, Angela ; Greengross, Sally ; Hughes, Sara ; Lincoln, Paul ; Lobstein, Tim ; Naylor, Chris ; Salay, Rebecca ; Wiseman, Martin ; Maryon-Davis, Alan</creatorcontrib><description>Background In November 2008, the Secretary of State for Health (England) commissioned an independent review to propose effective strategies for reducing health inequalities. Review task groups were given just 3 months to make preliminary evidence-based recommendations. In this paper, we describe the methodology used, and the recommendations made, by the group tasked with inequalities in priority public health conditions. Methods A series of rapid literature reviews of the policy-relevant international evidence base was undertaken. Quantitative studies of any design, which looked at the effects on health inequalities, the social gradient or overall population health effects, of interventions designed to address the social determinants of selected public health priority conditions were examined. Recommendations were distilled using a Delphi approach. Results Five key policy proposals were made: reduce smoking in the most deprived groups; improve availability of and access to healthier food choices amongst low income groups; improve the early detection and treatment of diseases; introduce a minimum price per unit for alcohol and improve the links between physical and mental health care. Conclusion The combination of rapid review and Delphi distillation produced a shortlist of evidence-based recommendations within the allocated time frame. There was a dearth of robust evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions we examined: our proposals had to be based on extrapolation from general population health effects. Extensive, specific and robust evidence is urgently needed to guide policy and programmes. In the meantime, our methodology provides a reasonably sound and pragmatic basis for evidence-based policy-making.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1741-3842</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-3850</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdq028</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20435581</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Cardiovascular Diseases ; England ; Evidence based ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Health ; Health Improvement ; Health inequalities ; Health Planning Guidelines ; Health Policy ; Health Status Disparities ; Humans ; Interventions ; Mental Health ; Methodology ; Neoplasms ; Obesity ; Policy Making ; Priorities ; Public Health ; Review Literature as Topic ; social determinants</subject><ispartof>Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2010-12, Vol.32 (4), p.496-505</ispartof><rights>Faculty of Public Health 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-77d8fafc3f39606f76c977aeac253a2ebf2570c92ff816bbe4791477d4cc9f0d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-77d8fafc3f39606f76c977aeac253a2ebf2570c92ff816bbe4791477d4cc9f0d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45157973$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45157973$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27922,27923,30998,58015,58248</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20435581$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bambra, Clare</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joyce, Kerry E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellis, Mark A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greatley, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greengross, Sally</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hughes, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lincoln, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lobstein, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naylor, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salay, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiseman, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maryon-Davis, Alan</creatorcontrib><title>Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy</title><title>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</title><addtitle>J Public Health (Oxf)</addtitle><description>Background In November 2008, the Secretary of State for Health (England) commissioned an independent review to propose effective strategies for reducing health inequalities. Review task groups were given just 3 months to make preliminary evidence-based recommendations. In this paper, we describe the methodology used, and the recommendations made, by the group tasked with inequalities in priority public health conditions. Methods A series of rapid literature reviews of the policy-relevant international evidence base was undertaken. Quantitative studies of any design, which looked at the effects on health inequalities, the social gradient or overall population health effects, of interventions designed to address the social determinants of selected public health priority conditions were examined. Recommendations were distilled using a Delphi approach. Results Five key policy proposals were made: reduce smoking in the most deprived groups; improve availability of and access to healthier food choices amongst low income groups; improve the early detection and treatment of diseases; introduce a minimum price per unit for alcohol and improve the links between physical and mental health care. Conclusion The combination of rapid review and Delphi distillation produced a shortlist of evidence-based recommendations within the allocated time frame. There was a dearth of robust evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions we examined: our proposals had to be based on extrapolation from general population health effects. Extensive, specific and robust evidence is urgently needed to guide policy and programmes. In the meantime, our methodology provides a reasonably sound and pragmatic basis for evidence-based policy-making.</description><subject>Cardiovascular Diseases</subject><subject>England</subject><subject>Evidence based</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine</subject><subject>Health</subject><subject>Health Improvement</subject><subject>Health inequalities</subject><subject>Health Planning Guidelines</subject><subject>Health Policy</subject><subject>Health Status Disparities</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Interventions</subject><subject>Mental Health</subject><subject>Methodology</subject><subject>Neoplasms</subject><subject>Obesity</subject><subject>Policy Making</subject><subject>Priorities</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Review Literature as Topic</subject><subject>social determinants</subject><issn>1741-3842</issn><issn>1741-3850</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1v1DAQxS0EoqX0yBHkG6dQf8RxzA31g0VaCQmBVPViOfaYumTjrJ2U7p0_HFfpLkdOHvv95o01D6E3lHygRPGzce424M682xLWPkPHVNa04q0gzw91zY7Qq5zvCGGKEfESHTFScyFaeoz-fAM32zD8xLdg-ukWhwG2s-nDFCCXCx5TiClMO1wG9cHuMRsHV5g45I94zo_9yYzB4QT3AX7jKWIH99DHsRjEMWbTZ-xjwkV2MFioOpPB4TEWz91r9MIXAE6fzhP04-ry-_mqWn_9_OX807qyNeNTJaVrvfGWe64a0njZWCWlAWOZ4IZB55mQxCrmfUubroNaKlqXrtpa5YnjJ-j94lv-tJ0hT3oTsoW-NwPEOetWcEak4PT_JGWUM6XaQlYLaVPMOYHXZWMbk3aaEv2YkF4S0ktChX_35Lw87-l9JAV4uwB3eYrpoNeCCqkk_zcw5AkeDrpJv3QjuRR6dX2jxdV6dX3BLzTjfwH5e6qZ</recordid><startdate>201012</startdate><enddate>201012</enddate><creator>Bambra, Clare</creator><creator>Joyce, Kerry E.</creator><creator>Bellis, Mark A.</creator><creator>Greatley, Angela</creator><creator>Greengross, Sally</creator><creator>Hughes, Sara</creator><creator>Lincoln, Paul</creator><creator>Lobstein, Tim</creator><creator>Naylor, Chris</creator><creator>Salay, Rebecca</creator><creator>Wiseman, Martin</creator><creator>Maryon-Davis, Alan</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201012</creationdate><title>Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy</title><author>Bambra, Clare ; Joyce, Kerry E. ; Bellis, Mark A. ; Greatley, Angela ; Greengross, Sally ; Hughes, Sara ; Lincoln, Paul ; Lobstein, Tim ; Naylor, Chris ; Salay, Rebecca ; Wiseman, Martin ; Maryon-Davis, Alan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-77d8fafc3f39606f76c977aeac253a2ebf2570c92ff816bbe4791477d4cc9f0d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Cardiovascular Diseases</topic><topic>England</topic><topic>Evidence based</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine</topic><topic>Health</topic><topic>Health Improvement</topic><topic>Health inequalities</topic><topic>Health Planning Guidelines</topic><topic>Health Policy</topic><topic>Health Status Disparities</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Interventions</topic><topic>Mental Health</topic><topic>Methodology</topic><topic>Neoplasms</topic><topic>Obesity</topic><topic>Policy Making</topic><topic>Priorities</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Review Literature as Topic</topic><topic>social determinants</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bambra, Clare</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joyce, Kerry E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellis, Mark A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greatley, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greengross, Sally</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hughes, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lincoln, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lobstein, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naylor, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salay, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiseman, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maryon-Davis, Alan</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bambra, Clare</au><au>Joyce, Kerry E.</au><au>Bellis, Mark A.</au><au>Greatley, Angela</au><au>Greengross, Sally</au><au>Hughes, Sara</au><au>Lincoln, Paul</au><au>Lobstein, Tim</au><au>Naylor, Chris</au><au>Salay, Rebecca</au><au>Wiseman, Martin</au><au>Maryon-Davis, Alan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</jtitle><addtitle>J Public Health (Oxf)</addtitle><date>2010-12</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>496</spage><epage>505</epage><pages>496-505</pages><issn>1741-3842</issn><eissn>1741-3850</eissn><abstract>Background In November 2008, the Secretary of State for Health (England) commissioned an independent review to propose effective strategies for reducing health inequalities. Review task groups were given just 3 months to make preliminary evidence-based recommendations. In this paper, we describe the methodology used, and the recommendations made, by the group tasked with inequalities in priority public health conditions. Methods A series of rapid literature reviews of the policy-relevant international evidence base was undertaken. Quantitative studies of any design, which looked at the effects on health inequalities, the social gradient or overall population health effects, of interventions designed to address the social determinants of selected public health priority conditions were examined. Recommendations were distilled using a Delphi approach. Results Five key policy proposals were made: reduce smoking in the most deprived groups; improve availability of and access to healthier food choices amongst low income groups; improve the early detection and treatment of diseases; introduce a minimum price per unit for alcohol and improve the links between physical and mental health care. Conclusion The combination of rapid review and Delphi distillation produced a shortlist of evidence-based recommendations within the allocated time frame. There was a dearth of robust evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions we examined: our proposals had to be based on extrapolation from general population health effects. Extensive, specific and robust evidence is urgently needed to guide policy and programmes. In the meantime, our methodology provides a reasonably sound and pragmatic basis for evidence-based policy-making.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>20435581</pmid><doi>10.1093/pubmed/fdq028</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1741-3842
ispartof Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2010-12, Vol.32 (4), p.496-505
issn 1741-3842
1741-3850
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_853207531
source MEDLINE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Cardiovascular Diseases
England
Evidence based
Evidence-Based Medicine
Health
Health Improvement
Health inequalities
Health Planning Guidelines
Health Policy
Health Status Disparities
Humans
Interventions
Mental Health
Methodology
Neoplasms
Obesity
Policy Making
Priorities
Public Health
Review Literature as Topic
social determinants
title Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T21%3A46%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reducing%20health%20inequalities%20in%20priority%20public%20health%20conditions:%20using%20rapid%20review%20to%20develop%20proposals%20for%20evidence-based%20policy&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20health%20(Oxford,%20England)&rft.au=Bambra,%20Clare&rft.date=2010-12&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=496&rft.epage=505&rft.pages=496-505&rft.issn=1741-3842&rft.eissn=1741-3850&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/pubmed/fdq028&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45157973%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=812132998&rft_id=info:pmid/20435581&rft_jstor_id=45157973&rfr_iscdi=true