ArticleBMJ open2024
Qualitative study of UK health and care professionals to determine resources and processes that can support actions to improve quality of data used to address and monitor health inequalities.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealth inequalities in the UK are investigated and addressed by analysing data across socioeconomic factors, geography and specific characteristics, including those protected under law. It is acknowledged that the quality of data underpinning these analyses can be improved. The objective of this work was to gain insights from professionals working across the health and care sector in England into the type(s) of resource(s) that can be instrumental in implementing mechanisms to improve data quality into practice.
designQualitative study based on semistructured interviews involving health and care professionals.
settingEngland.
participantsA total of 16 professionals, mainly from the East of England.
resultsAwareness of mechanisms that could be put in place to improve quality of data related to health inequalities was high among interviewees. However, logistical (eg, workforce time, capacity and funding) as well as data usage (eg, differences in data granularity, information governance structures) barriers impacted on implementation of many mechanisms. Participants also acknowledged that concepts and priorities around health inequalities can vary across the system. While there are resources already available that can aid in improving data quality, finding them and ensuring they are suited to needs was time-consuming. Our analysis indicates that resources to support the creation of a shared understanding of what health inequalities are and share knowledge of specific initiatives to improve data quality between systems, organisations and individuals are useful.
conclusionsDifferent resources are needed to support actions to improve quality of data used to investigate heath inequalities. These include those aimed at raising awareness about mechanisms to improve data quality as well as those addressing system-level issues that impact on implementation. The findings of this work provide insights into actionable steps local health and care services can take to improve the quality of data used to address health inequalities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.