Trial reportPloS one2013
Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incorporating an equity perspective in systematic reviews of interventions: potential methodological approaches.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Improving the reporting on health equity in observational research (STROBE-Equity): extension checklist and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases in Germany and Europe - results of the European Health Interview Survey (EHIS 3, 2018 - 2020).Journal of health monitoring · 2024Article
- Temporal dynamics of socioeconomic inequalities in depressive and anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Socioeconomic Status, Overweight, and Obesity in Childhood and Adolescence—Secular Trends From the Nationwide German Kiggs StudyDeutsches Arzteblatt international · 2022Article
- Educational differences in the prevalence of behavioural risk factors in Germany and the EU - Results from the European Health Interview Survey (EHIS) 2.Journal of health monitoring · 2019Article
- Article
- Equity-Specific Effects of Interventions to Promote Physical Activity among Middle-Aged and Older Adults: Development of a Collaborative Equity-Specific Re-Analysis Strategy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Health inequalities among children and adolescents in Germany. Developments over time and trends from the KiGGS study.Journal of health monitoring · 2019Article
- Equity Impact Assessment of Interventions to Promote Physical Activity among Older Adults: A Logic Model Framework.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Socioeconomic Inequalities in the Rise of Adult Obesity: A Time-Trend Analysis of National Examination Data from Germany, 1990-2011.Obesity facts · 2019Article
- Post-millennial trends of socioeconomic inequalities in chronic illness among adults in Germany.BMC research notes · 2018Article
- Health inequalities in Germany and in international comparison: trends and developments over time.Journal of health monitoring · 2018Article
- GRADE equity guidelines 1: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: introduction and rationale.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2017Article
- GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2017Article
- Article
- Changing educational inequalities in sporting inactivity among adults in Germany: a trend study from 2003 to 2012.BMC public health · 2017Article
- Monitoring subnational regional inequalities in health: measurement approaches and challenges.International journal for equity in health · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Reducing health inequalities is a key objective for many governments and public health organizations. Whether inequalities are measured on the absolute (difference) or relative (ratio) scale can have a significant impact on judgments about whether health inequalities are increasing or decreasing, but both of these measures are not often presented in empirical studies. In this study we investigated the impact of selective presentation of health inequality measures on judgments of health inequality trends among 40 university undergraduates. We randomized participants to see either a difference or ratio measure of health inequality alongside raw mortality rates in 5 different scenarios. At baseline there were no differences between treatment groups in assessments of inequality trends, but selective exposure to the same raw data augmented with ratio versus difference inequality graphs altered participants' assessments of inequality change. When absolute inequality decreased and relative inequality increased, exposure to ratio measures increased the probability of concluding that inequality had increased from 32.5% to 70%, but exposure to difference measures did not (35% vs. 25%). Selective exposure to ratio versus difference inequality graphs thus increased the difference between groups in concluding that inequality had increased from 2.5% (95% CI -9.5% to 14.5%) to 45% (95% CI 29.4 to 60.6). A similar pattern was evident for other scenarios where absolute and relative inequality trends gave conflicting results. In cases where measures of absolute and relative inequality both increased or both decreased, we did not find any evidence that assignment to ratio vs. difference graphs had an impact on assessments of inequality change. Selective reporting of measures of health inequality has the potential to create biased judgments of progress in ameliorating health inequalities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.