Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29197356›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2017

Social and health outcomes following upgrades to a national housing standard: a multilevel analysis of a five-wave repeated cross-sectional survey.

Wouter Poortinga, Nikki Jones, Simon Lannon, Huw Jenkins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors.

Wouter PoortingaWelsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University, Bute Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, Wales, CF10 3NB, UK. PoortingaW@cardiff.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6926-8545
Nikki JonesWelsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University, Bute Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, Wales, CF10 3NB, UK.
Simon LannonWelsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University, Bute Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, Wales, CF10 3NB, UK.
Huw JenkinsWelsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University, Bute Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, Wales, CF10 3NB, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile existing research indicates that housing improvements are associated with health improvements, less is known about the wider social and health benefits of meeting national housing standards, as well as those of their specific constituent measures. This study evaluates the impacts of a managed housing upgrade programme through a repeated cross-sectional survey design.

methodsA five-wave repeated cross-sectional survey was conducted over a seven-year period from 2009 to 2016 (n = 2075; n = 2219; n = 2015; n = 1991; and n = 1709, respectively). The study followed a managed upgrade programme designed to meet a national social housing standard over an extended period. The data were analysed from a multilevel perspective to take account of the time-dependent nature of the observations and differences in socio-demographic composition.

resultsThe installation of the majority of individual housing measures (new windows and doors; boilers; kitchens; bathrooms; electrics; loft insulation; and cavity/external wall insulation) were associated with improvements in several social (housing suitability, satisfaction, and quality; thermal comfort and household finances) and health (mental, respiratory and general health) outcomes; and analyses showed relationships between the number of measures installed and the total amount invested on the one hand and the social and health outcomes on the other. There were however a few exceptions. Most notably, the installation of cavity wall insulation was associated with poorer health outcomes, and did not lead to better social outcomes. Also, no association was found between the number of measures installed and respiratory health.

conclusionsThe study suggests that substantial housing investments through a managed upgrade programme may result in better social and health outcomes, and that the size of the improvements are proportionate to the number of measures installed and amount invested. However, there may be risks associated with specific measures; and more attention is needed for mechanical ventilation when upgrading energy efficiency of houses through fabric work. In addition to providing new evidence regarding the wider social and health outcomes, the study provides an analytical approach to evaluate upgrade programmes that are delivered over multiple years.

Indexed as

Health StatusAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth SurveysHousingHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultilevel AnalysisProgram EvaluationSocioeconomic FactorsWalesFuel povertyHousing qualityHousing standardsMental healthRespiratory health

Identifiers

PMID29197356
PMCPMC5712147

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.