Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36865399›Full record

ArticleEvidence & policy : a journal of research, debate and practice2022

Eliciting public values on health inequalities: missing evidence for

Neil McHugh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence & policy : a journal of research, debate and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

1 author.

Neil McHughGlasgow Caledonian University, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 217292
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is a widening health divide in the UK despite health inequalities being a long-standing subject of policy and research. New types of evidence are needed. Key points for discussion: Knowledge of public values for non-health policies and their associated (non-)health outcomes is currently missing from decision-making processes. Eliciting public values using stated preference techniques can provide insights on what the general public would be willing to give-up for different distributions of (non-)health outcomes and the policies that can achieve them. To understand the role this evidence could have in decision-making processes, Kingdon's multiple streams analysis (MSA) is used as a policy lens to explore Conclusions and implications: This paper outlines how evidence of public values could be elicited through the use of stated preference techniques and suggests this could facilitate the creation of

Indexed as

health inequalitiespolicy windowspublic values

Identifiers

PMID36865399
PMCPMC7614257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.