ArticleBMC public health2013
The effectiveness of health impact assessment in influencing decision-making in Australia and New Zealand 2005-2009.
Article in BMC public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Health Impact Assessments of Health Sector Proposals: An Audit and Narrative Synthesis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Routemap for health impact assessment implementation: scoping review using the consolidated framework for implementation research.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Global priorities in HIA research: a new agenda for the next decade.BMC public health · 2025Article
- A New Framework for Monitoring and Evaluating Health Impact Assessment: Capitalising on a French Case Study with the Literature in Evaluation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Health Equity Impact Assessment (HEIA) reporting tool: developing a checklist for policymakers.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Implementation of Health Impact Assessment in the Healthcare System of the Republic of Kazakhstan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Evaluating Racial/Ethnic Equity in Planning-Related U.S. Health Impact Assessments Involving Parks and Greenspaces: A Review.Journal of the American Planning Association. American Planning Association · 2023Article
- Predicted and observed impacts of COVID-19 lockdowns: two Health Impact Assessments in Scotland and Wales.Health promotion international · 2022Article
- Facilitators, Barriers and Views on the Role of Public Health Institutes in Promoting and Using Health Impact Assessment-An International Virtual Scoping Survey and Expert Interviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Assessing the health impacts of transnational corporations: a case study of Carlton and United Breweries in Australia.Globalization and health · 2022Article
- Heart-Focused Anxiety Among Trauma-Exposed Latinx Young Adults: Relations to General Depression, Suicidality, Anxious Arousal, and Social Anxiety.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2022Article
- The Built Environment and Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: a Review on Quantitative Health Impact Assessments.Current environmental health reports · 2022Review
- Framework for Participatory Quantitative Health Impact Assessment in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- The Elaboration of an Intersectoral Partnership to Perform Health Impact Assessment in Urban Planning: The Experience of Quebec City (Canada).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Health Impact Assessments in Spain: Have They Been Effective?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Effectiveness of Health Impact Assessments: A Synthesis of Data From Five Impact Evaluation Reports.Preventing chronic disease · 2016Review
- Is health impact assessment useful in the context of trade negotiations? A case study of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement.BMJ open · 2016Article
- What makes health impact assessments successful? Factors contributing to effectiveness in Australia and New Zealand.BMC public health · 2015Article
- An evaluation of health impact assessments in the United States, 2011-2014.Preventing chronic disease · 2015Review
- Investigating underlying principles to guide health impact assessment.International journal of health policy and management · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth Impact Assessment (HIA) involves assessing how proposals may alter the determinants of health prior to implementation and recommends changes to enhance positive and mitigate negative impacts. HIAs growing use needs to be supported by a strong evidence base, both to validate the value of its application and to make its application more robust. We have carried out the first systematic empirical study of the influence of HIA on decision-making and implementation of proposals in Australia and New Zealand. This paper focuses on identifying whether and how HIAs changed decision-making and implementation and impacts that participants report following involvement in HIAs.
methodsWe used a two-step process first surveying 55 HIAs followed by 11 in-depth case studies. Data gathering methods included questionnaires with follow-up interview, semi-structured interviews and document collation. We carried out deductive and inductive qualitative content analyses of interview transcripts and documents as well as simple descriptive statistics.
resultsWe found that most HIAs are effective in some way. HIAs are often directly effective in changing, influencing, broadening areas considered and in some cases having immediate impact on decisions. Even when HIAs are reported to have no direct effect on a decision they are often still effective in influencing decision-making processes and the stakeholders involved in them. HIA participants identify changes in relationships, improved understanding of the determinants of health and positive working relationships as major and sustainable impacts of their involvement.
conclusionsThis study clearly demonstrates direct and indirect effectiveness of HIA influencing decision making in Australia and New Zealand. We recommend that public health leaders and policy makers should be confident in promoting the use of HIA and investing in building capacity to undertake high quality HIAs. New findings about the value HIA stakeholders put on indirect impacts such as learning and relationship building suggest HIA has a role both as a technical tool that makes predictions of potential impacts of a policy, program or project and as a mechanism for developing relationships with and influencing other sectors. Accordingly when evaluating the effectiveness of HIAs we need to look beyond the direct impacts on decisions.
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.