Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35257184›Full record

SynthesisJournal of public health (Oxford, England)2022

Do recommended interventions widen or narrow inequalities in musculoskeletal health? An equity-focussed systematic review of differential effectiveness.

G Peat, K P Jordan, R Wilkie, N Corp, D A van der Windt, D Yu, G Narle, N Ali

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

8 authors.

G PeatPrimary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9008-0184
K P JordanPrimary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.
R WilkiePrimary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.
N CorpPrimary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.
D A van der WindtPrimary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.
D YuPrimary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.
G NarlePublic Health England, London, SE1 8UG, UK.
N AliOffice for Health Improvement and Disparities, Department of Health and Social Care, London, SW1H 0EU, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is unclear whether seven interventions recommended by Public Health England for preventing and managing common musculoskeletal conditions reduce or widen health inequalities in adults with musculoskeletal conditions.

methodsWe used citation searches of Web of Science (date of 'parent publication' for each intervention to April 2021) to identify original research articles reporting subgroup or moderator analyses of intervention effects by social stratifiers defined using the PROGRESS-Plus frameworks. Randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, systematic reviews presenting subgroup/stratified analyses or meta-regressions, individual participant data meta-analyses and modelling studies were eligible. Two reviewers independently assessed the credibility of effect moderation claims using Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Moderation Analyses. A narrative approach to synthesis was used (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019140018).

resultsOf 1480 potentially relevant studies, seven eligible analyses of single trials and five meta-analyses were included. Among these, we found eight claims of potential differential effectiveness according to social characteristics, but none that were judged to have high credibility.

conclusionsIn the absence of highly credible evidence of differential effectiveness in different social groups, and given ongoing national implementation, equity concerns may be best served by investing in monitoring and action aimed at ensuring fair access to these interventions.

Indexed as

Musculoskeletal DiseasesPublic HealthAdultEnglandHumansInterrupted Time Series Analysishealth inequalitieshealth outcomesinterventionsmusculoskeletal disorderssocial stratifierssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35257184
PMCPMC9424108

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.