Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26853897›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2016

The feasibility of measuring and monitoring social determinants of health and the relevance for policy and programme - a qualitative assessment of four countries.

Erik Blas, John E Ataguba, Tanvir M Huda, Giang Kim Bao, Davide Rasella, Megan R Gerecke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Developing a National Set of Health Equity Indicators Using a Consensus Building Process.International journal of health policy and management · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

6 authors.

Erik BlasInternational Public Health Consultant, Copenhagen, Denmark; erik@blas.dk.
John E AtagubaHealth Economics Unit, School of Public Health & Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Tanvir M HudaSchool of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Giang Kim BaoInstitute of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Davide RasellaInstitute of Collective Health, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.
Megan R GereckeSocial Determinants of Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince the publication of the reports by the Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH), many research papers have documented inequities, explaining causal pathways in order to inform policy and programmatic decision-making. At the international level, the sustainable development goals (SDGs) reflect an attempt to bring together these themes and the complexities involved in defining a comprehensive development framework. However, to date, much less has been done to address the monitoring challenges, that is, how data generation, analysis and use are to become routine tasks.

objectiveTo test proposed indicators of social determinants of health (SDH), gender, equity, and human rights with respect to their relevance in tracking progress in universal health coverage and population health (level and distribution).

designIn an attempt to explore these monitoring challenges, indicators covering a wide range of social determinants were tested in four country case studies (Bangladesh, Brazil, South Africa, and Vietnam) for their technical feasibility, reliability, and validity, and their communicability and usefulness to policy-makers. Twelve thematic domains with 20 core indicators covering different aspects of equity, human rights, gender, and SDH were tested through a review of data sources, descriptive analyses, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. To test the communicability and usefulness of the domains, domain narratives that explained the causal pathways were presented to policy-makers, managers, the media, and civil society leaders.

resultsFor most countries, monitoring is possible, as some data were available for most of the core indicators. However, a qualitative assessment showed that technical feasibility, reliability, and validity varied across indicators and countries. Producing understandable and useful information proved challenging, and particularly so in translating indicator definitions and data into meaningful lay and managerial narratives, and effectively communicating links to health and ways in which the information could improve decision-making.

conclusionsThis exercise revealed that for monitoring to produce reliable data collection, analysis, and discourse, it will need to be adapted to each national context and institutionalised into national systems. This will require that capacities and resources for this and subsequent communication of results are increased across countries for both national and international monitoring, including the successful implementation of the SDGs.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityHuman RightsAdministrative PersonnelAsia, SoutheasternBrazilData CollectionFeasibility StudiesHealth PolicyHealth ResourcesHumansQualitative ResearchReproducibility of ResultsSocial Determinants of HealthSouth Africaequitygenderhuman rightsintersectoral actionsustainable development goalsuniversal health coverage

Identifiers

PMID26853897
PMCPMC4744867

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.