Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28086971›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2017

Characteristics and use of urban health indicator tools by municipal built environment policy and decision-makers: a systematic review protocol.

Helen Pineo, Ketevan Glonti, Harry Rutter, Nicole Zimmermann, Paul Wilkinson, Michael Davies

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Urban Health Indicator Tools of the Physical Environment: a Systematic Review.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Shaping Policy Change in Population Health: Policy Entrepreneurs, Ideas, and Institutions.International journal of health policy and management · 2018
    Article
  6. 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.

Helen PineoInstitute of Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN, UK. helen.pineo.15@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1029-3022
Ketevan GlontiECOHOST-The Centre for Health and Social Change, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Harry RutterECOHOST-The Centre for Health and Social Change, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Nicole ZimmermannInstitute of Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN, UK.
Paul WilkinsonDepartment of Social and Environmental Health Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Michael DaviesInstitute of Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is wide agreement that there is a lack of attention to health in municipal environmental policy-making, such as urban planning and regeneration. Explanations for this include differing professional norms between health and urban environment professionals, system complexity and limited evidence for causality between attributes of the built environment and health outcomes. Data from urban health indicator (UHI) tools are potentially a valuable form of evidence for local government policy and decision-makers. Although many UHI tools have been specifically developed to inform policy, there is poor understanding of how they are used. This study aims to identify the nature and characteristics of UHI tools and their use by municipal built environment policy and decision-makers.

methodsHealth and social sciences databases (ASSIA, Campbell Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, Social Policy and Practice and Web of Science Core Collection) will be searched for studies using UHI tools alongside hand-searching of key journals and citation searches of included studies. Advanced searches of practitioner websites and Google will also be used to find grey literature. Search results will be screened for UHI tools, and for studies which report on or evaluate the use of such tools. Data about UHI tools will be extracted to compile a census and taxonomy of existing tools based on their specific characteristics and purpose. In addition, qualitative and quantitative studies about the use of these tools will be appraised using quality appraisal tools produced by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and synthesised in order to gain insight into the perceptions, value and use of UHI tools in the municipal built environment policy and decision-making process. This review is not registered with PROSPERO. DISCUSSION: This systematic review focuses specifically on UHI tools that assess the physical environment's impact on health (such as transport, housing, air quality and greenspace). This study will help indicator producers understand whether this form of evidence is of value to built environment policy and decision-makers and how such tools should be tailored for this audience. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: N/A.

Indexed as

Health Status IndicatorsPolicy MakingPublic PolicyCity PlanningDecision MakingHumansSystematic Reviews as TopicUrban HealthUrban RenewalBuilt environmentEvidenceIndicatorIndicesPolicySocial determinants of healthUrbanUrban healthUrban metrics

Identifiers

PMID28086971
PMCPMC5237355

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.