SynthesisBMJ open2022
Systematic review of the effectiveness of the health inequalities strategy in England between 1999 and 2010.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of primary care funding on health inequalities: an umbrella review.Primary health care research & development · 2025Pooled it
- Socioeconomic Factors and Health Disparities Among North Korean Refugee Populations.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Community engagement and empowerment to address health inequalities: A rapid evidence review.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Health Inequalities in Crisis Times: Questions for Global Health Governance.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness and equity impact of complex primary care interventions for disadvantaged populations.BJGP open · 2026Article
- Reframing health inequality? The rise, rise and fall of three competing policy frames.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Approaches for community intervention and research priority setting to reduce health inequalities: a scoping review.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic deprivation and its association with polypharmacy in England: results from a national cross-sectional survey.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Evaluating the impact of a parent champion model on bronchiolitis hospitalisation rates: a difference in differences study.Archives of disease in childhood · 2026Article
- The life expectancy gap: Socioeconomic differences in life expectancy between areas in Germany.Journal of health monitoring · 2025Article
- Labour's 10 year plan for the English NHS.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Premature mortality analysis of 52,000 deceased cats and dogs exposes socioeconomic disparities.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cross-sector collaboration to reduce health inequalities: a qualitative study of local collaboration between health care, social services, and other sectors under health system reforms in England.BMC public health · 2024Article
- The impact of the English national health inequalities strategy on inequalities in mortality at age 65: a time-trend analysis.European journal of public health · 2024Article
- Conservative Party's legacy on the NHS.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- The U-Shaped Curve of Health Inequalities Over the 20th and 21st Centuries.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2024Article
- Article
- The performance of general practice in the English National Health Service (NHS): an analysis using Starfield's framework for primary care.Health affairs scholar · 2024Article
- What needs to happen to 'level up' public health?Contemporary social science · 2023Article
- Labour's health "mission".BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 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
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this systematic review is to explore the effectiveness of the National Health Inequality Strategy, which was conducted in England between 1999 and 2010.
designThree databases (Ovid Medline, Embase and PsycINFO) and grey literature were searched for articles published that reported on changes in inequalities in health outcomes in England over the implementation period. Articles published between January 1999 and November 2021 were included. Title and abstracts were screened according to an eligibility criteria. Data were extracted from eligible studies, and risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool.
resultsThe search strategy identified 10 311 unique studies, which were screened. 42 were reviewed in full text and 11 were included in the final review. Six studies contained data on inequalities of life expectancy or mortality, four on disease-specific mortality, three on infant mortality and three on morbidities. Early government reports suggested that inequalities in life expectancy and infant mortality had increased. However, later publications using more accurate data and more appropriate measures found that absolute and relative inequalities had decreased throughout the strategy period for both measures. Three of four studies found a narrowing of inequalities in all-cause mortality. Absolute inequalities in mortality due to cancer and cardiovascular disease decreased, but relative inequalities increased. There was a lack of change, or widening of inequalities in mental health, self-reported health, health-related quality of life and long-term conditions.
conclusionsWith respect to its aims, the strategy was broadly successful. Policymakers should take courage that progress on health inequalities is achievable with long-term, multiagency, cross-government action. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021285770).
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.