Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35219286›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of health policy and management2022

Governance of Intersectoral Collaborations for Population Health and to Reduce Health Inequalities in High-Income Countries: A Complexity-Informed Systematic Review.

Elizabeth Such, Katherine Smith, Helen Buckley Woods, Petra Meier

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of health policy and management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Therapeutic potential of phytochemical compounds in cardiovascular disease: a comprehensive review.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth SuchSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2242-3357
Katherine SmithUniversity of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1060-4102
Helen Buckley WoodsResearch on Research Institute, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Petra MeierMRC/CSA Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5354-1933
University of Sheffield · GBMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit · GBUniversity of Strathclyde · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office SPHSU20Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/5Medical Research Council MR/S037578/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA 'Health in All Policies' (HiAP) approach has been widely advocated as a way to involve multiple government sectors in addressing health inequalities, but implementation attempts have not always produced the expected results. Explaining how HiAP-style collaborations have been governed may offer insights into how to improve population health and reduce health inequalities.

methodsTheoretically focused systematic review. Synthesis of evidence from evaluative studies into a causal logic model.

resultsThirty-one publications based on 40 case studies from nine high-income countries were included. Intersectoral collaborations for population health and equity were multi-component and multi-dimensional with collaborative activity spanning policy, strategy, service design and service delivery. Governance of intersectoral collaboration included structural and relational components. Both internal and external legitimacy and credibility delivered collaborative power, which in turn enabled intersectoral collaboration. Internal legitimacy was driven by multiple structural elements and processes. Many of these were instrumental in developing (often-fragile) relational trust. Internal credibility was supported by multi-level collaborations that were adequately resourced and shared power. External legitimacy and credibility was created through meaningful community engagement, leadership that championed collaborations and the identification of 'win-win' strategies. External factors such as economic shocks and short political cycles reduced collaborative power.

conclusionThis novel review, using systems thinking and causal loop representations, offers insights into how collaborations can generate internal and external legitimacy and credibility. This offers promise for future collaborative activity for population health and equity; it presents a clearer picture of what structural and relational components and dynamics collaborative partners can focus on when planning and implementing HiAP initiatives. The limits of the literature base, however, does not make it possible to identify if or how this might deliver improved population health or health equity.

Indexed as

Intersectoral CollaborationPopulation HealthDeveloped CountriesGovernmentHealth PolicyHumansGovernanceHealth EquityHealth in All PoliciesHealth InequalitiesHealthy Public PolicyIntersectoral Collaboration

Identifiers

PMID35219286
PMCPMC10105187
OpenAlexW4213380996

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.