ArticleIranian journal of public health2021
Basic Criteria, Models, and Indicators of Intersectoral Collaboration in Health Promotion: A Scoping Review.
Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing 'connective tissue' in public-private partnerships: a stakeholder survey on multisectoral collaboration in global health.Globalization and health · 2025Article
- Methods for evaluating intersectoral action partnerships to address the social determinants of health: a scoping review.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2024Article
- Mechanisms of Intersectoral Collaboration in the Health System: A Scoping Review.Iranian journal of public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, the basic criteria, models, and indicators of intersectoral collaboration in health promotion were investigated to facilitate the implementation of collaboration.
methodsThis scoping review was conducted using datasets of Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, and search engines of Google, Google Scholar, and ProQuest.
results52 studies were included, and 32 codes in Micro, Meso, and Macro level, were obtained. Micro-level criteria had the highest frequency. Among the models used in the reviewed studies, social network analysis, Diagnosis of Sustainable Collaboration, Bergen, and logic models had the highest frequency. Among the indicators studied, the number of participants and the level of collaboration as well as its sustainability were the most frequent indicators.
conclusionThe findings identified the most important and widely used criteria, models, and indicators of intersectoral collaboration in health promotion which can be useful for decision-makers and planners in the domain of health promotion, in designing, implementing, and evaluating collaborative programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.