Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38616280›Full record

ArticlePerspectives in public health2024

Predictors of fuel poverty and the equity of local fuel poverty support: secondary analysis of data from Bradford, England.

E Little, A Barnes, M Power

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

E LittlePublic Health Registrar, Bradford Council, Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5122-8599
A BarnesSenior Research Fellow, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK.
M PowerResearch Fellow, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAddressing fuel poverty is a critical public health issue given its recent rise in prevalence across Europe. Although previous research identifies national risk markers of fuel poverty, evidence is lacking on whether these are consistent across local geographies, and the equity of local interventions. In the UK's current economic climate, it is more crucial than ever that services benefit households in greatest need. This study aimed to determine significant predictors of fuel poverty among households in Bradford, England, comparing them to national-level predictors, and evaluate if households possessing significant fuel poverty predictors were equitably referred to a local fuel poverty service (Warm Homes Healthy People, WHHP).

methodsA multivariate logistic regression model determined significant fuel poverty predictors in Bradford using household-level data from the Energy Saving Trust and the Low Income High Costs fuel poverty definition. Statistical testing highlighted significant differences in predictors of fuel poverty between households referred to WHHP and all Bradford households.

resultsSignificant (

conclusionsLocal fuel poverty predictors were similar to many national-level predictors, but identified differences in the direction of the relationship between some national and local predictors reaffirm the value of locally focused research. WHHP successfully targeted households possessing key predictors, but should ensure that ethnic minorities, younger people, and multiperson households are equitably referred.

Indexed as

PovertyEnglandFamily CharacteristicsHousingHumansIncomeSocioeconomic Factorsenergy povertyequityfuel povertyinequalitieslogistic regression

Identifiers

PMID38616280
PMCPMC11103903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.