44
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intersectoral action for health equity: a rapid systematic review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Action on the social determinants of health is considered a necessary approach to improving health equity. Most of the social determinants of health lie outside the sphere of the health sector and thus collaboration with governmental and non-governmental sectors outside of health are required to develop policies and programs to improve health equity. Case studies of intersectoral action are available, however there is limited information about the impact of intersectoral action on the social determinants of health and health equity.

          Methods

          Search and retrieval of literature published between 2001 and 2011 was conducted in 6 databases. A staged screening of titles and abstracts, and later full-text, was conducted by two independent reviewers. Reviewers independently assessed the quality of the articles deemed relevant for inclusion. Data were extracted and synthesized in narrative format for all included studies, conducted by one reviewer and checked by another.

          Results

          17 articles of varied methodological quality met the inclusion criteria. One systematic review investigating partnership interventions found mixed and limited impacts on health outcomes. Primary studies evaluating the impact of upstream and midstream interventions showed mixed effects. Downstream interventions were generally moderately effective in increasing the availability and use of services by marginalized communities.

          Conclusions

          The literature evaluating the impact of intersectoral action on health equity is limited. The included studies identified reveal a moderate to no effect on the social determinants of health. The evidence on the impact of intersectoral action on health equity is even more limited. The lack of evidence should not be interpreted as a lack of effect. Rigorous evaluations of intersectoral action are needed to strengthen the evidence base of this public health practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)

          Background Thousands of systematic reviews have been conducted in all areas of health care. However, the methodological quality of these reviews is variable and should routinely be appraised. AMSTAR is a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews. Methodology AMSTAR was used to appraise 42 reviews focusing on therapies to treat gastro-esophageal reflux disease, peptic ulcer disease, and other acid-related diseases. Two assessors applied the AMSTAR to each review. Two other assessors, plus a clinician and/or methodologist applied a global assessment to each review independently. Conclusions The sample of 42 reviews covered a wide range of methodological quality. The overall scores on AMSTAR ranged from 0 to 10 (out of a maximum of 11) with a mean of 4.6 (95% CI: 3.7 to 5.6) and median 4.0 (range 2.0 to 6.0). The inter-observer agreement of the individual items ranged from moderate to almost perfect agreement. Nine items scored a kappa of >0.75 (95% CI: 0.55 to 0.96). The reliability of the total AMSTAR score was excellent: kappa 0.84 (95% CI: 0.67 to 1.00) and Pearson's R 0.96 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.98). The overall scores for the global assessment ranged from 2 to 7 (out of a maximum score of 7) with a mean of 4.43 (95% CI: 3.6 to 5.3) and median 4.0 (range 2.25 to 5.75). The agreement was lower with a kappa of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.88). Construct validity was shown by AMSTAR convergence with the results of the global assessment: Pearson's R 0.72 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.84). For the AMSTAR total score, the limits of agreement were −0.19±1.38. This translates to a minimum detectable difference between reviews of 0.64 ‘AMSTAR points’. Further validation of AMSTAR is needed to assess its validity, reliability and perceived utility by appraisers and end users of reviews across a broader range of systematic reviews.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A scoping review of intersectoral action for health equity involving governments.

            We carried out a scoping review to identify and describe scholarly and grey literature referring to global cases of intersectoral action for health equity featuring a central role for governments. The scoping review process systematically identified articles describing one or more cases of intersectoral action. Each article was then described in terms of the context of initiation, as well as the strategies, actors, tools and structures used to implement these initiatives. 128 unique articles were found describing intersectoral action across 43 countries. A majority of the cases appear to have initiated in the last decade. A variety of approaches were used to carry out intersectoral action, but articles varied in the richness of information included to describe different aspects of these initiatives. With this examination of cases across multiple countries and contexts, we can begin to clarify how intersectoral approaches to health equity have been used; however, the description of these complex, multi-actor processes in the published documents was generally superficial and sometimes entirely absent and improvements in such documentation in future publications is warranted. Richer sources of information such as interviews may facilitate a more comprehensive understanding from the perspective of multiple sectors involved.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Systematic reviews: critical links in the great chain of evidence.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central
                1471-2458
                2013
                9 November 2013
                : 13
                : 1056
                Affiliations
                [1 ]National Collaborating Centre for Determinants of Health, P.O.Box 5000, Antigonish NS B2G 2 W5, Canada
                Article
                1471-2458-13-1056
                10.1186/1471-2458-13-1056
                3830502
                24209299
                a9e11b17-2c81-4b7c-bc80-67bc328f4149
                Copyright © 2013 Ndumbe-Eyoh and Moffatt; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 23 April 2013
                : 31 October 2013
                Categories
                Research Article

                Public health
                intersectoral action,health equity,socioeconomic factors,social determinants of health

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log