Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39430873›Full record

ArticleCities & health2022

Incorporating practitioner knowledge to test and improve a new conceptual framework for healthy urban design and planning.

Helen Pineo, Gemma Moore, Isobel Braithwaite

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cities & health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Helen PineoInstitute for Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1029-3022
Gemma MooreInstitute for Environmental Design and Engineering, Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8175-4645
Isobel BraithwaiteUCL Institute for Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5327-5612

Funding

Wellcome Trust 209387
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are increasing arguments for bridging diverse knowledges and co-producing new knowledge between researchers, professional communities and citizens to create health-promoting built environments. The new THRIVES Framework (Towards Healthy uRbanism: InclusiVe, Equitable, Sustainable) echoes the call that healthy urbanism processes should be participatory and this principle informed the development of the Framework itself, which involved several stages of informal and formal testing with stakeholders, through a process of action research and 'extended peer review'. Formal feedback about the design of the preliminary Framework and its implementation in built environment practice was gathered through a participatory workshop with 26 built environment and public health professionals in January 2020. Participants were encouraged to share their knowledge, ask questions, critique and provide recommendations. Overall, participants were supportive of the conceptual messages of the THRIVES Framework and more critical of the visual design of the preliminary version. They also questioned whether further resources would be required to implement the Framework. This research created a forum for stakeholders, who may typically be outside the research process, to shape the development of a conceptual framework for healthy urbanism. Further research and collaboration will create resources to bridge the gap between this new conceptualisation and practice.

Indexed as

designhealth and wellbeingparticipatory researchplanningUrban

Identifiers

PMID39430873
PMCPMC7616717

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.