ReviewHealth services research2022
Cocreating evidence-informed health equity policy with community.
Review in Health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health information priorities and recommendations: findings from community listening sessions with women of refugee background from Myanmar in Western Australia.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
- Informing equitable noncommunicable disease prevention policies through lived experience: a scoping review of research approaches.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Physical-medical integration policies and health equity promotion in China: a text analysis based on policy instruments.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- ¿No Hay Racismo?: application of the levels of racism framework to Latinx perspectives on barriers to health and wellbeing.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Using policy codesign to achieve multi-sector alignment in adolescent behavioral health: a study protocol.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Activities used by evidence networks to promote evidence-informed decision-making in the health sector- a rapid evidence review.BMC health services research · 2024Review
- Protocol for the development of guidance for collaborator and partner engagement in health care evidence syntheses.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Municipal officials' perspectives on policymaking for addressing obesity and health equity.Evidence & policy : a journal of research, debate and practice · 2023Article
- Cocreating evidence-informed health equity policy with community.Health services research · 2022Review
- Translating research into policy and action.Health services research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the feasibility of a rapid, community-engaged strategy to prioritize health equity policy options as informed by research evidence, community-voiced needs, and public health priorities. DATA SOURCES: Data came from residents in a midsized, demographically, and geographically diverse county over a period of 8 months in 2020 and an evidence review of the health equity policy literature during the same time period. STUDY
designA descriptive case study is used to explore the feasibility and potential value of a community codesigned approach to establish community priorities for health equity policy. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsEvidence synthesis of health equity policy was conducted parallel to 15 community listening sessions across the county to elicit information on health needs. We used scoping review methods to obtain literature from academic databases and scholarly public health and policy organizations. This information was cross walked with themes from the listening sessions to identify 10 priority policy areas, which were taken back to the community for 15 participatory discussion and ranking sessions. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe process appeared to authentically engage the input of 200 community members representative of minoritized groups while identifying 99 evidence-informed policy levers to promote health equity. Discussion and ranking activities were successful in facilitating community discussion and policy decision making. Remote platforms may have limited the engagement of some residents while promoting the participation of others. Conducting information integration within the research team prior to community policy ranking sessions limited the community ownership over how policies were interpreted and communicated.
conclusionsA combination of information integration and community ranking activities can be used to achieve community-engaged policy prioritization of options in a fairly rapid period of time. While this process provides an example of authentic community ownership of policy prioritization, the compressed timeline limited the community's engagement in the information integration phase.
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.