Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34256744›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2021

Pushing poverty off limits: quality improvement and the architecture of healthcare values.

Polly Mitchell, Alan Cribb, Vikki Entwistle, Guddi Singh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2021. 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. 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

4 authors.

Polly MitchellCentre for Public Policy Research, School of Education, Communication and Society, King's College London, Waterloo Bridge Wing, Franklin-Wilkins Building, Waterloo Road, London, SE1 9NH, UK. polly.mitchell@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-7680-0264
Alan CribbCentre for Public Policy Research, School of Education, Communication and Society, King's College London, Waterloo Bridge Wing, Franklin-Wilkins Building, Waterloo Road, London, SE1 9NH, UK.
Vikki EntwistleHealth Services Research Unit and School of Divinity, History and Philosophy, University of Aberdeen, 3rd floor, Health Sciences Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Guddi SinghMary Sheridan Centre for Child Health, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, 5 Dugard Way, London, SE11 4TH, UK.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 209811/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoverty and social deprivation have adverse effects on health outcomes and place a significant burden on healthcare systems. There are some actions that can be taken to tackle them from within healthcare institutions, but clinicians who seek to make frontline services more responsive to the social determinants of health and the social context of people's lives can face a range of ethical challenges. We summarise and consider a case in which clinicians introduced a poverty screening initiative (PSI) into paediatric practice using the discourse and methodology of healthcare quality improvement (QI). DISCUSSION: Whilst suggesting that interventions like the PSI are a potentially valuable extension of clinical roles, which take advantage of the unique affordances of clinical settings, we argue that there is a tendency for such settings to continuously reproduce a narrower set of norms. We illustrate how the framing of an initiative as QI can help legitimate and secure funding for practical efforts to help address social ends from within clinical service, but also how it can constrain and disguise the value of this work. A combination of methodological emphases within QI and managerialism within healthcare institutions leads to the prioritisation, often implicitly, of a limited set of aims and governing values for healthcare. This can act as an obstacle to a genuine broadening of the clinical agenda, reinforcing norms of clinical practice that effectively push poverty 'off limits.' We set out the ethical dilemmas facing clinicians who seek to navigate this landscape in order to address poverty and the social determinants of health.

conclusionsWe suggest that reclaiming QI as a more deliberative tool that is sensitive to these ethical dilemmas can enable managers, clinicians and patients to pursue health-related values and ends, broadly conceived, as part of an expansive range of social and personal goods.

Indexed as

PovertyQuality ImprovementChildDelivery of Health CareHealth FacilitiesHumansQuality of Health CareHealthcare qualityHealthcare valuesPovertyQIQuality improvementScreeningSocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID34256744
PMCPMC8278597

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.