Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32357876›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2020

The social value of investing in public health across the life course: a systematic scoping review.

Kathryn Ashton, Peter Schröder-Bäck, Timo Clemens, Mariana Dyakova, Anna Stielke, Mark A Bellis

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Public deliberation on health gain measures.Health affairs scholar · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Kathryn AshtonPolicy and International Health, WHO Collaborating Centre on Investment for Health and Well-being, Public Health Wales, Capital Quarter 2, Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF104BZ, Wales. kathryn.ashton2@wales.nhs.uk.
Peter Schröder-BäckDepartment of International Health, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, School CAPHRI (Care and Public Health Research Institute), Duboisdomein 30, 6229 GT, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Timo ClemensDepartment of International Health, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, School CAPHRI (Care and Public Health Research Institute), Duboisdomein 30, 6229 GT, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Mariana DyakovaPolicy and International Health, WHO Collaborating Centre on Investment for Health and Well-being, Public Health Wales, Capital Quarter 2, Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF104BZ, Wales.
Anna StielkePolicy and International Health, WHO Collaborating Centre on Investment for Health and Well-being, Public Health Wales, Capital Quarter 2, Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF104BZ, Wales.
Mark A BellisPolicy and International Health, WHO Collaborating Centre on Investment for Health and Well-being, Public Health Wales, Capital Quarter 2, Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF104BZ, Wales.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaking the case for investing in public health by illustrating the social, economic and environmental value of public health interventions is imperative. Economic methodologies to help capture the social value of public health interventions such as Social Return on Investment (SROI) and Social Cost-Benefit Analysis (SCBA) have been developed over past decades. The life course approach in public health reinforces the importance of investment to ensure a good start in life to safeguarding a safe, healthy and active older age. This novel review maps an overview of the application of SROI and SCBA in the existing literature to identify the social value of public health interventions at individual stages of the life course.

methodsA systematic scoping review was conducted on peer-reviewed and grey literature to identify SROI and SCBA studies of public health interventions published between January 1996 and June 2019. All primary research articles published in the English language from high-income countries that presented SROI and SCBA outputs were included. Studies were mapped into stages of the life course, and data on the characteristics of the studies were extracted to help understand the application of social value methodology to assess the value of public health interventions.

resultsOverall 40 SROI studies were included in the final data extraction, of which 37 were published in the grey literature. No SCBA studies were identified in the search. Evidence was detected at each stage of the life course which included; the birth, neonatal period, postnatal period and infancy (n = 2); childhood and adolescence (n = 17); adulthood (main employment and reproductive years) (n = 8); and older adulthood (n = 6). In addition, 7 studies were identified as cross-cutting across the life course in their aims.

conclusionThis review contributes to the growing evidence base that demonstrates the use of social value methodologies within the field of public health. By mapping evidence across stages of the life course, this study can be used as a starting point by public health professionals and institutions to take forward current thinking about moving away from traditional economic measures, to capturing social value when investing in interventions across the life course.

Indexed as

Social ValuesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleGlobal HealthHealth PromotionHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInvestmentsMalePublic healthSocial return on investment, social cost-benefit analysis, life courseSocial value

Identifiers

PMID32357876
PMCPMC7193413

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.