Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33105901›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Conceptualization of Roma in Policy Documents Related to Social Inclusion and Health in the Czech Republic.

Lenka Slepickova, Daniela Filakovska Bobakova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Lenka SlepickovaOlomouc University Social Health Institute, Theological Faculty, Palacky University Olomouc, 771 11 Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Daniela Filakovska BobakovaOlomouc University Social Health Institute, Theological Faculty, Palacky University Olomouc, 771 11 Olomouc, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-9336-3884

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the Czech Republic, a number of strategy papers and policy documents are guiding the direction of Roma inclusion, including in the area of health. The conceptualization of Roma and how mainstream political and public discourse operate with the term "Roma" contribute to a mistakenly homogenous and harmful image of Roma that conforms to negative stereotypes. The aim of our study was to examine the conceptualization of Roma in policy documents related to social inclusion and health in the Czech Republic. Relevant political, strategic and project documents were selected for analysis. Emphasis is placed in them on individual responsibility in relation to health, while structural conditions and discrimination are mentioned less often. Roma are described in relation to health primarily as people who should be educated. More emphasis is placed on the economic benefits of eliminating health inequalities than on citizens' rights and the importance of inclusion. When "participation" or "empowerment" is mentioned, it is done vaguely, usually in addition to references to completely non-participatory practices. The majority is the primary actor in the field of eliminating health inequalities, as it defines the "path" that Roma need to be shown or determines what is needed to "stimulate" citizens. Although the political discourse concerning Roma has shifted more towards human rights, equity and combating discrimination in the Czech Republic, subtle forms of anti-Gypsyism still seem to be present.

Indexed as

Health PolicyRomani PeopleSocial InclusionConcept FormationCzech RepublicHumansconceptualization of RomaCzech Republichealthpolicy documentssocial inclusion

Identifiers

PMID33105901
PMCPMC7660212

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.