Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29273655›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Politics, policies and processes: a multidisciplinary and multimethods research programme on policies on the social determinants of health inequity in Australia.

Fran Baum, Sharon Friel

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Implementing 'Closing the Gap' policy through mainstream service provision: A South Australian case study.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  9. Designing a Health Strategy at Local Level: A Conceptual Framework for Local Governments.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. How do advisory groups contribute to healthy public policy research?International journal of public health · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fran BaumSouthgate Institute for Health, Society and Equity, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Sharon FrielSchool of Regulation and Global Governance (RegNet), College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Australian National University · AUFlinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe development and implementation of multisectoral policy to improve health and reduce health inequities has been slow and uneven. Evidence is largely focused on the facts of health inequities rather than understanding the political and policy processes. This 5-year funded programme of research investigates how these processes could function more effectively to improve equitable population health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The programme of work is organised in four work packages using four themes (macroeconomics and infrastructure, land use and urban environments, health systems and racism) related to the structural drivers shaping the distribution of power, money and resources and daily living conditions. Policy case studies will use publicly available documents (policy documents, published evaluations, media coverage) and interviews with informants (policy-makers, former politicians, civil society, private sector) (~25 per case). NVIVO software will be used to analyse the documents to see how 'social and health equity' is included and conceptualised. The interview data will include qualitative descriptive and theory-driven critical discourse analysis. Our quantitative methodological work assessing the impact of public policy on health equity is experimental that is in its infancy but promises to provide the type of evidence demanded by policy-makers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our programme is recognising the inherently political nature of the uptake, formulation and implementation of policy. The early stages of our work indicate its feasibility. Our work is aided by a Critical Policy Reference Group. Multiple ethics approvals have been obtained with the foundation approval from the Social and Behavioural Ethics Committee, Flinders University (Project No: 6786).The theoretical, methodological and policy engagement processes established will provide improved evidence for policy-makers who wish to reduce health inequities and inform a new generation of policy savvy knowledge on social determinants.

Indexed as

Health EquityHealth PolicyInterdisciplinary CommunicationPolicy MakingPoliticsSocial Determinants of HealthAustraliaHumansQualitative ResearchResearch DesignSoftwarehealth inequitiespublic policyqualitative researchsocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID29273655
PMCPMC5778301
OpenAlexW2777561767

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.