Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36883395›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics2022

Health Justice Through the Lens of Power.

Jamila Michener

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Voting Restrictions and Increased Odds of Adverse Birth Outcomes in the US.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026
    Article
  3. The Bleeding Disorders Research Collaborative.Blood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Applying anti-racist approaches to informatics: a new lens on traditional frames.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Article
  12. Racism and Health: Three Core Principles.The Milbank quarterly · 2023
    Article
  13. A Clarion Call for Change: The MLP Imperative to Center Racial Discrimination and Structural Health Inequities.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2023
    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.

Jamila MichenerCORNELL UNIVERSITY, ITHICA, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health justice is an aspirational north star for scholars, practitioners, and anyone who refuses to accept the status quo of profound inequity. But what does health justice mean? How ought we conceptualize it? There is no correct answer to these questions, but any robust rendering of health justice must account for power and politics. This article posits that the path to health justice requires political struggle taking (at least) two forms: (1) building power and (2) breaking power. Building power for health justice means cultivating the political capacity of people who are disproportionately harmed by health inequity, and who therefore have the most at stake. Breaking power involves weakening and destabilizing the economic and political forces that perpetuate health inequity. By surfacing and elaborating these crucial modes of political struggle, this article points to a way forward for achieving health justice.

Indexed as

GarbageHumansPoliticsHealth JusticePoliticsPower

Identifiers

PMID36883395
PMCPMC10009378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read1
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.