Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31482385›Full record

SynthesisJournal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine2020

Use of Urban Health Indicator Tools by Built Environment Policy- and Decision-Makers: a Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

Helen Pineo, Ketevan Glonti, Harry Rutter, Nici Zimmermann, Paul Wilkinson, Michael Davies

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Participatory Systems Mapping for Municipal Prioritization and Planning.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2022
    Article
  4. Bibliometric Analysis and Research Trend Forecast of Healthy Urban Planning for 40 Years (1981-2020).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Helen PineoInstitute for Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN, UK. helen.pineo@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1029-3022
Ketevan GlontiSchool of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Split, Split, Croatia.
Harry RutterDepartment of Social & Policy Sciences, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, UK.
Nici ZimmermannInstitute for Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN, UK.
Paul WilkinsonDepartment of Social and Environmental Health Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Michael DaviesInstitute for Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Global initiatives have raised awareness of the need for cross-departmental and cross-sectoral activities to support urban health, sustainability, and equity, with respective indicators routinely used as a way to catalyze and monitor action toward pre-defined goals. Despite the existence of at least 145 urban health indicator (UHI) tools globally, there has been very little research on the use of indicators by policy- and decision-makers; more attention has been devoted to their development and validation. This paper describes the second part of a two-part systematic review of the characteristics (part A) and use (part B, this part) of UHI tools by municipal built environment policy- and decision-makers. Part B is a narrative synthesis of studies on the use of UHI tools. This PRISMA-P compliant review follows a mixed methods sequential explanatory design. The search was conducted using seven bibliographic databases, grey literature searches, and key journal hand searches. Ten studies describing the use of ten UHI tools in seven countries were included in the narrative synthesis, resulting in development of a theory of change (ToC). We found that both expert-led and participatory indicator projects can be underpinned by research evidence and residents' knowledge. Our findings contradict the dominant view of indicator use in policy-making as a linear process, highlighting a number of technical, organizational, political, knowledge, and contextual factors that affect their use. Participatory UHI tools with community involvement were generally more effective at supporting "health in all policies" and "whole-of-society" approaches to governing healthy cities than expert-led processes. UHI tool producers proposed a range of techniques to address urban health complexity characteristics. Finally, in combining data from both parts of the review, we found that potentially important UHI tool features, such as neighbourhood-scale data, were influential in the use of indicators by built environment policy- and decision-makers.

Indexed as

Built EnvironmentHealth Status IndicatorsPublic PolicyUrban HealthCity PlanningHumansPolicy MakingBuilt environmentEvidenceHealthy citiesIndicatorsIndicesSocial determinants of healthUrban metricsUrban planningUrban policy

Identifiers

PMID31482385
PMCPMC7305281

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.