Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25347193›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2014

Advancing efforts to achieve health equity: equity metrics for health impact assessment practice.

Jonathan Heller, Marjory L Givens, Tina K Yuen, Solange Gould, Maria Benkhalti Jandu, Emily Bourcier, Tim Choi

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Avenues of Influence: the Relationship between Health Impact Assessment and Determinants of Health and Health Equity.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jonathan HellerHuman Impact Partners, 304 12th Street, #2B, Oakland, CA 94607, USA. jch@humanimpact.org.
Marjory L GivensDepartment of Population Health Sciences, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53726, USA. mgivens@wisc.edu.
Tina K YuenNational Association of County and City Health Officials, 1100 17th Street NW, Seventh Floor, Washington, DC 20036, USA. tyuen@naccho.org.
Solange GouldSchool of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 50 University Hall #7360, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. solange.g@icloud.com.
Maria Benkhalti JanduInstitute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, 1 Stewart Street, Room 300, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada. maria.benkhalti.jandu@uottawa.ca.
Emily BourcierCenter for Community Health and Evaluation, Group Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA. bourcier.e@ghc.org.
Tim ChoiSolano County Health and Social Services Department, 275 Beck Avenue, MS 5-240, Fairfield, CA 94533, USA. tmchoi@solanocounty.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Equity is a core value of Health Impact Assessment (HIA). Many compelling moral, economic, and health arguments exist for prioritizing and incorporating equity considerations in HIA practice. Decision-makers, stakeholders, and HIA practitioners see the value of HIAs in uncovering the impacts of policy and planning decisions on various population subgroups, developing and prioritizing specific actions that promote or protect health equity, and using the process to empower marginalized communities. There have been several HIA frameworks developed to guide the inclusion of equity considerations. However, the field lacks clear indicators for measuring whether an HIA advanced equity. This article describes the development of a set of equity metrics that aim to guide and evaluate progress toward equity in HIA practice. These metrics also intend to further push the field to deepen its practice and commitment to equity in each phase of an HIA. Over the course of a year, the Society of Practitioners of Health Impact Assessment (SOPHIA) Equity Working Group took part in a consensus process to develop these process and outcome metrics. The metrics were piloted, reviewed, and refined based on feedback from reviewers. The Equity Metrics are comprised of 23 measures of equity organized into four outcomes: (1) the HIA process and products focused on equity; (2) the HIA process built the capacity and ability of communities facing health inequities to engage in future HIAs and in decision-making more generally; (3) the HIA resulted in a shift in power benefiting communities facing inequities; and (4) the HIA contributed to changes that reduced health inequities and inequities in the social and environmental determinants of health. The metrics are comprised of a measurement scale, examples of high scoring activities, potential data sources, and example interview questions to gather data and guide evaluators on scoring each metric.

Indexed as

Health Impact AssessmentCaliforniaHumansProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID25347193
PMCPMC4245599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.