Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37579369›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2023

A Social, Not a Natural Science: Engaging With Broader Fields in Health Policy Analysis Comment on "Modelling the Health Policy Process: One Size Fits All or Horses for Courses?"

Justin Parkhurst

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health policy and management, 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. Article
  2. Policy Horses Still Running Around Healthcare Courses: A Response to Recent Commentaries.International journal of health policy and management · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Justin ParkhurstDepartment of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0831-6213

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Powell and Mannion's recent editorial discusses how different 'models' of the policy process have been applied within the health policy field. They present two ways forward for scholarship: more 'home grown' development of health-specific models, or deeper engagement with broader public policy scholarship. In this paper I argue for the latter approach for several reasons. First, health policy analysis is a social, not a natural science - and as such is not exceptional to other forms of policy scholarship. Second, many 'health policy models' are often grounded in conceptual work from elsewhere (or may not be health specific). Finally, there has been significant work to develop more nuanced understandings of theories, models, and frameworks available to particular analytical tasks and questions. As such, the growing body of global health policy scholarship may find it can benefit more from deeper engagement with existing conceptual work than constructing its own new models in most cases.

Indexed as

Natural Science DisciplinesPolicy MakingAnimalsGlobal HealthHealth PolicyHorsesPublic PolicyFrameworksHealth PolicyHealth Policy ProcessesModelsPublic PolicyTheories

Identifiers

PMID37579369
PMCPMC10461874

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.