Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37161420›Full record

ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2023

Health promotion and disease prevention registries in the EU: a cross country comparison.

Christin Rossmann, Sandra Radoš Krnel, Marika Kylänen, Katarzyna Lewtak, Claudio Tortone, Paola Ragazzoni, Mara Grasso, Alison Maassen, Luciana Costa, Djoeke van Dale

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Christin RossmannFederal Centre for Health Education (BZgA), 50825, Cologne, Germany.
Sandra Radoš KrnelNational Institute of Public Health, Ljubljana, 1000, Slovenia.
Marika KylänenFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), PO Box 30, Helsinki, 00271, Finland.
Katarzyna LewtakNational Institute of Public Health NIH-NRI (NIPH NIH-NRI), Warsaw, 00-791, Poland.
Claudio TortoneDoRS - Health Promotion Regional Documentation Centre, Regione Piemonte ASL TO3, Grugliasco (Turin), I- 10095, Italy.
Paola RagazzoniDoRS - Health Promotion Regional Documentation Centre, Regione Piemonte ASL TO3, Grugliasco (Turin), I- 10095, Italy.
Mara GrassoDoRS - Health Promotion Regional Documentation Centre, Regione Piemonte ASL TO3, Grugliasco (Turin), I- 10095, Italy.
Alison MaassenEuroHealthNet, Brussels, 1000, Belgium.
Luciana CostaNational Institute of Health Dr. Ricardo Jorge, Lisboa, Lisbon, 1649-016, Portugal.
Djoeke van DaleNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, PO Box 1, Bilthoven, 3720, The Netherlands. djoeke.van.dale@rivm.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth promotion and disease prevention programme registries (HPPRs), also called 'best practice portals', serve as entry points and practical repositories that provide decision-makers with easy access to (evidence-based) practices. However, there is limited knowledge of differences or overlaps of howe current national HPPRs in Europe function, the context and circumstances in which these HPPRs were developed, and the mechanisms utilised by each HPPR for the assessment, classification and quality improvement of the included practices. This study prepared an overview of different approaches in several national HPPRs and the EU Best Practice Portal (EU BPP) as well as identified commonalities and differences among the core characteristics of the HPPRs.

methodsWe conducted a descriptive comparison - that focused on six European countries with existing or recently developed/implemented national HPPR and the EU BPP -to create a comparative overview. We used coding mechanisms to identify commonalities and differences; we performed data management, collection and building consensus during EuroHealthNet Thematic Working Group meetings.

resultsAll HPPRs offer a broad range of health promotion and disease-prevention practices and serve to support practitioners, policymakers and researchers in selecting practices. Almost all HPPRs have an assessment process in place or planned, requiring the application of assessment criteria that differ among the HPPRs. While all HPPRs collect and share recommendable practices, others have implemented further measures to improve the quality of the submitted practices. Different dissemination tools and strategies are employed to promote the use of the HPPRs, including social media, newsletters and publications as well as capacity building workshops for practice owners or technical options to connect citizens/patients with local practices.

conclusionsCollaboration between HPPRs (at national and EU level) is appreciated, especially regarding the use consistent terminology to avoid misinterpretation, facilitate cross-country comparison and enable discussions on the adaption of assessment criteria by national HPPRs. Greater efforts are needed to promote the actual implementation and transfer of practices at the national level to address public health challenges with proven and effective practices.

Indexed as

AssessmentDisease preventionEvidence-based practicesHealth promotionImplementation

Identifiers

PMID37161420
PMCPMC10170815

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.