Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32455055›Full record

ArticleSAGE open2015

The Developing Role of Evidence-Based Environmental Health: Perceptions, Experiences, and Understandings From the Front Line.

Surindar Dhesi, Jill Stewart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SAGE open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The New Environmental Health in Australia: Failure to Launch?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

2 authors.

Surindar DhesiUniversity of Manchester, UK.
Jill StewartUniversity of Greenwich, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been renewed recognition that proactive strategies and interventions can address the social determinants of health, and the environmental health profession is well placed to effect positive change in many of these determinants. This qualitative research has revealed differences in the perceptions, experiences, and understandings of evidence-based practice among public health professionals from different backgrounds across different services in health care and local government in England. The absence of a strong tradition of evidence-based practice in environmental health appears to be a disadvantage in securing funding and playing a full role, as it has become the expectation in the new public health system. This has, at times, resulted in tensions between professionals with different backgrounds and frustration on the part of environmental health practitioners, who have a tradition of responding quickly to new challenges and "getting on with the job." There is generally a willingness to develop evidence-based practice in environmental health; however, this will take time and investment.

Indexed as

environmental healthevidence-based practicelocal governmentpublic healthsocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID32455055
PMCPMC7233299

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.