Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30417067›Full record

ArticleSSM - population health2018

Credibility of subgroup analyses by socioeconomic status in public health intervention evaluations: An underappreciated problem?

Greig Inglis, Daryll Archibald, Lawrence Doi, Yvonne Laird, Stephen Malden, Louise Marryat, John McAteer, Jan Pringle, John Frank

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in SSM - population health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Social Determinants of Health: Time to Re-Think?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Review
  8. 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

9 authors.

Greig InglisScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
Daryll ArchibaldScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
Lawrence DoiScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
Yvonne LairdScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
Stephen MaldenScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
Louise MarryatScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
John McAteerScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
Jan PringleScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.
John FrankScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, EH8 9DX, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K023209/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is increasing interest amongst researchers and policy makers in identifying the effect of public health interventions on health inequalities by socioeconomic status (SES). This issue is typically addressed in evaluation studies through subgroup analyses, where researchers test whether the effect of an intervention differs according to the socioeconomic status of participants. The credibility of such analyses is therefore crucial when making judgements about how an intervention is likely to affect health inequalities, although this issue appears to be rarely considered within public health. The aim of this study was therefore to assess the credibility of subgroup analyses in published evaluations of public health interventions. An established set of 10 credibility criteria for subgroup analyses was applied to a purposively sampled set of 21 evaluation studies, the majority of which focussed on healthy eating interventions, which reported differential intervention effects by SES. While the majority of these studies were found to be otherwise of relatively high quality methodologically, only 8 of the 21 studies met at least 6 of the 10 credibility criteria for subgroup analysis. These findings suggest that the credibility of subgroup analyses conducted within evaluations of public health interventions' impact on health inequalities may be an underappreciated problem.

Indexed as

Equity and public health interventionsHealth inequalitiesHealth inequitiesPolicy impact by socioeconomic status

Identifiers

PMID30417067
PMCPMC6214868

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.