ArticleHealth promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice2024
Methods for evaluating intersectoral action partnerships to address the social determinants of health: a scoping review.
Article in Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMany of the social and economic factors that shape conditions for population health and health equity (e.g. income, education and employment) lie outside of the health sector. Intersectoral action (ISA) is pivotal to building diverse partnerships that address these social determinants of health. Despite the significant role of ISA, there are few comprehensive reports from the health sector on how such partnerships are evaluated. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of examples of ISA partnership evaluations, including the identification of evaluation methods, tools and indicators.
methodsA literature search of two academic databases, Embase and MEDLINE, identified seven relevant studies published between 2012 and 2022.
resultsCommon evaluation approaches were network analysis, community- or system- level analysis, partnership evaluation and longitudinal process evaluation. Five of the studies assessed the strength and functionality of partnerships, with reach (e.g. distance between partners) used most frequently as an indicator.
conclusionDespite the complexity of evaluating ISA partnerships, such evaluations are crucial for assessing impacts on health outcomes and social determinants of health, goal achievement, accountability and sustainability. Different evaluation models are available to program planners and evaluators involved in ISA initiatives.
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.