Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28951402›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

When is a randomised controlled trial health equity relevant? Development and validation of a conceptual framework.

J Jull, M Whitehead, M Petticrew, E Kristjansson, D Gough, J Petkovic, J Volmink, C Weijer, M Taljaard, S Edwards and 20 more

Abstract readConsensus Statement
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. A systematic review examining socioeconomic factors in trials of interventions for men that report weight as an outcome.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Steps towards equity in research.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023
    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

30 authors.

J JullOttawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
M WhiteheadDepartment of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
M PetticrewDepartment of Social and Environmental Health Research, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
E KristjanssonCentre for Research on Educational and Community Services, School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
D GoughDepartment of Social Science, Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre, Social Science Research Unit, University College London, London, UK.
J PetkovicBruyère Continuing Care, Bruyère Research Institute, Elisabeth Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
J VolminkThe South African Cochrane Center, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.
C WeijerRotman Institute of Philosophy, University of Western Ontario, Ontario, Canada.
M TaljaardClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
S EdwardsResearch Ethics and Governance, University College London, London, UK.
L MbuagbawDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
R CooksonCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
J McGowanDepartment of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
A LyddiattCochrane Musculoskeletal Group, Ontario, Canada.
Y BoyerBrandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada.
L G CuervoOffice of Knowledge Management, Bioethics and Research, Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
R ArmstrongMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
H WhiteCampbell Collaboration, New Delhi, India.
M YoganathanBruyère Continuing Care, Bruyère Research Institute, Elisabeth Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
T PantojaDepartment of Family Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
B SheaBruyère Continuing Care, Bruyère Research Institute, Elisabeth Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
K Pottie
O NorheimCentre for Intervention Science in Matnernal and Child Health (CISMAC), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
S BairdDepartment of Global Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
B RobberstadCentre for Intervention Science in Matnernal and Child Health (CISMAC), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
H SommerfeltCentre for Intervention Science in Matnernal and Child Health (CISMAC), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Y AsadaDepartment of Community Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
G WellsDepartment of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
P TugwellBruyère Continuing Care, Bruyère Research Institute, Elisabeth Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
V WelchBruyère Continuing Care, Bruyère Research Institute, Elisabeth Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

Department of Health SRF-2013-06-015World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRandomised controlled trials can provide evidence relevant to assessing the equity impact of an intervention, but such information is often poorly reported. We describe a conceptual framework to identify health equity-relevant randomised trials with the aim of improving the design and reporting of such trials.

methodsAn interdisciplinary and international research team engaged in an iterative consensus building process to develop and refine the conceptual framework via face-to-face meetings, teleconferences and email correspondence, including findings from a validation exercise whereby two independent reviewers used the emerging framework to classify a sample of randomised trials.

resultsA randomised trial can usefully be classified as 'health equity relevant' if it assesses the effects of an intervention on the health or its determinants of either individuals or a population who experience ill health due to disadvantage defined across one or more social determinants of health. Health equity-relevant randomised trials can either exclusively focus on a single population or collect data potentially useful for assessing differential effects of the intervention across multiple populations experiencing different levels or types of social disadvantage. Trials that are not classified as 'health equity relevant' may nevertheless provide information that is indirectly relevant to assessing equity impact, including information about individual level variation unrelated to social disadvantage and potentially useful in secondary modelling studies.

conclusionThe conceptual framework may be used to design and report randomised trials. The framework could also be used for other study designs to contribute to the evidence base for improved health equity.

Indexed as

Health EquityResearch DesignConsensusHealth Status DisparitiesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSocial JusticeSocioeconomic Factorsequityframeworkhealthrandomized controlled trials

Identifiers

PMID28951402
PMCPMC5623521

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.