Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32460096›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2020

"The state They're in": Unpicking fantasy paradigms of health improvement interventions as tools for addressing health inequalities.

Mhairi Mackenzie, Kathryn Skivington, Gillian Fergie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Identifying social prescribing core outcomes using a Delphi approach: findings and future directions.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Applying an equity lens to social prescribing.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Implementation and impact of a social prescribing intervention: an ethnographic exploration.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Mhairi MackenzieUrban Studies, School of Social & Political Sciences, University of Glasgow, 27 Bute Gardens, Glasgow, G12 8RS, Scotland, UK. Electronic address: Mhairi.mackenzie@glasgow.ac.uk.
Kathryn SkivingtonMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, UK.
Gillian FergieMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, UK.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office SPHSU11Chief Scientist Office SPHSU15Chief Scientist Office SPHSU18Medical Research Council MC_PC_13027Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_12017/11Medical Research Council MC_UU_12017/15
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Globally, it is recognised that the fundamental causes of iniquitous health outcomes lie within unequal distributions of wealth and power. Internationally, however, policies and interventions persist in individualising the inequalities problem and targeting individual behaviours as the main solution. This approach has been argued to represent 'Fantasy Paradigms'. This paper explores one example of such 'Fantasy' intervention from the perspective of health practitioners. Further, it explores opportunities for deepening practitioner understandings of the socio-political determination of health. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with 47 professionals involved in delivering a social prescribing programme in poor areas of Glasgow, Scotland. Data were analysed thematically across and within transcripts. Narratives highlighted different explanatory types concerning how the intervention could tackle health inequalities including: firm commitment to individualised approaches; hopeful pessimism; the social-determinants-of-health as an unpoliticised and nondeterministic backdrop to poor health; and finally, incomplete understanding of the social gradient as a population concept. Disrupted narratives of the social determination of health were also evident. This paper contributes new insights to existing debates on health inequalities discourse. These are conceptually important and identify opportunities for sharpening practitioner understanding of the social determinants of health which could in turn contribute to better, non-stigmatising primary care. It argues that re-engaging communities of practice with what is meant by determination of health is necessary and that there is a need to de-couple the policy aim of reducing health inequalities from the delivery of structurally competent and equality-focused public services.

Indexed as

FantasyHealth Status DisparitiesHealth PolicyHumansQuality ImprovementScotlandHealth inequalitiesPrimary careQualitative researchSocial determinants of healthSocial prescribingStructural competencyUK

Identifiers

PMID32460096
PMCPMC7306155

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.