ArticleAustralian and New Zealand journal of public health2013
Characteristics of health impact assessments reported in Australia and New Zealand 2005-2009.
Article in Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evidence for the effectiveness of health impact assessment in spatial planning on health outcomes: A systematic review and stakeholder involvement from a UK perspective.Public health · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic Literature Review of Health Impact Assessments in Low and Middle-Income Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Pooled it
- Quantitative Health Impact Assessment of Environmental Exposures Linked to Urban Transport and Land Use in Europe: State of Research and Research Agenda.Current environmental health reports · 2025Review
- Climate Change Adaptation Methods for Public Health Prevention in Australia: an Integrative Review.Current environmental health reports · 2024Review
- Health Equity Impact Assessment (HEIA) reporting tool: developing a checklist for policymakers.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- The Development of a Rapid Health Impact Assessment Model for Songkhla Special Economic Zone (SEZ) Policy in Southern Thailand.Iranian journal of public health · 2021Article
- Framework for Participatory Quantitative Health Impact Assessment in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Urban health: an example of a "health in all policies" approach in the context of SDGs implementation.Globalization and health · 2019Article
- 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
- Health Impact Assessment practice and potential for integration within Environmental Impact and Strategic Environmental Assessments in Italy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014Article
- Evaluating the impact of equity focused health impact assessment on health service planning: three case studies.BMC health services research · 2014Article
- The effectiveness of health impact assessment in influencing decision-making in Australia and New Zealand 2005-2009.BMC public health · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the use and reporting of Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Australia and New Zealand between 2005 and 2009.
methodsWe identified 115 HIAs undertaken in Australia and New Zealand between 2005 and 2009. We reviewed 55 HIAs meeting the study's inclusion criteria to identify characteristics and appraise the quality of the reports.
resultsOf the 55 HIAs, 31 were undertaken in Australia and 24 in New Zealand. The HIAs were undertaken on plans (31), projects (12), programs (6) and policies (6). Compared to Australia, a higher proportion of New Zealand HIAs were on policies and plans and were rapid assessments done voluntarily to support decision-making. In both countries, most HIAs were on land use planning proposals. Overall, 65% of HIA reports were judged to be adequate.
conclusionThis study is the first attempt to empirically investigate the nature of the broad range of HIAs done in Australia and New Zealand and has highlighted the emergence of HIA as a growing area of public health practice. It identifies areas where current practice could be improved and provides a baseline against which future HIA developments can be assessed. IMPLICATIONS: There is evidence that HIA is becoming a part of public health practice in Australia and New Zealand across a wide range of policies, plans and projects. The assessment of quality of reports allows the development of practical suggestions on ways current practice may be improved. The growth of HIA will depend on ongoing organisation and workforce development in both countries.
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.