ArticleBMC public health2019
Understanding the unintended consequences of public health policies: the views of policymakers and evaluators.
Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The unintended consequences of school-based health and nutrition policies: a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Supporting policymakers with a decision aid to evaluate the impact of e-cigarette flavour restrictions.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Paid family leave and reduced acute respiratory infections in young infants: does everyone benefit equally?American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Accessibility and responsiveness of Better Access treatment services: Insights from the use of linked administrative data in the evaluation of Better Access.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Identifying and selecting outcome measures for the children and families domestic abuse core outcome set.Frontiers in sociology · 2026Article
- Operating in recurrent crises: a qualitative study of decision-making and unintended consequences in a peripheral hospital.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Smoking history is not independently associated with broad-spectrum antibiotic use in two nationally representative cohorts of adult men in South Korea.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Community engagement to support public health: mixed-method evaluation evidence on COVID-19 attitudes and practices in Lao PDR.Global health action · 2025Article
- 'Activating Indigenous ways' - perceptions of how Australian Indigenous health and wellbeing program evaluations are commissioned and future recommendations.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Legal and regulatory responses to online gambling harms: a scoping review of evidence.Harm reduction journal · 2025Article
- "We knew it was coming: we didn't act" perspectives from people who use drugs and substance use workforce on the impact of delays in implementation of the supervised injection facility and drug checking interventions.Harm reduction journal · 2025Article
- Questions regarding medication-related issues raised by legislators in the Indian parliament, 2017-2024.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Raising complex public health challenges on local government agendas: a Norwegian case study.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- What's in a Shame? Rethinking School Safety in the Face of Disruptive Threats.The Journal of school health · 2025Article
- Assessing Equitable Implementation of a Social Care Initiative Integrating Medical and Social Services for Medicaid Members.Health services research · 2025Article
- Preventing and addressing youth vaping in British Columbia, Canada: Evidence from triangulation of a scoping review of vaping policy and qualitative interviews with school-aged youth.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Review
- A qualitative analysis of unintended effects of a digital conditional cash transfer intervention to encourage healthcare utilization in Southern Madagascar.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Funding the pandemic response for Indigenous Peoples: an equity-based analysis of COVID-19 using a Health Equity Impact Assessment (HEIA) Indigenous lens tool.International journal of circumpolar health · 2024Article
- Clinical decision support systems for maternity care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublic health policies sometimes have unexpected effects. Understanding how policies and interventions lead to outcomes is essential if policymakers and researchers are to intervene effectively and reduce harmful and other unintended consequences (UCs) of their actions. Yet, evaluating complex mechanisms and outcomes is challenging, even before considering how to predict assess and understand outcomes and UCs when interventions are scaled up. We aimed to explore with UK policymakers why some policies have UCs, and how researchers and policymakers should respond.
methodsWe convened a one-day workshop with 14 people involved in developing, implementing or evaluating social and public health policies, and/or evaluating possible unintended effects. This included senior evaluators, policymakers from government and associated agencies, and researchers, covering policy domains from public health, social policy, poverty, and international development.
resultsPolicymakers suggested UCs happen for a range of reasons: poor policy design, unclear articulation of policy mechanisms or goals, or unclear or inappropriate evidence use, including evaluation techniques. While not always avoidable, it was felt that UCs could be partially mitigated by better use of theory and evidence, better involvement of stakeholders in concurrent design and evaluation of policies, and appropriate evaluation systems.
conclusionsUCs can be used to explore the mechanisms underpinning social change caused by public health policies. Articulating these mechanisms is essential for truly evidence-informed decision-making, to enable informed debate about policy options, and to develop evaluation techniques. Future work includes trying to develop a holistic stakeholder-led evaluation process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.