ArticleHealth promotion international2024
Overcoming doubt: developing CDoH Essentials, a practical tool to introduce the commercial determinants of health.
Article in Health promotion international, 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.
- Overcoming doubt: developing CDoH Essentials, a practical tool to introduce the commercial determinants of health.Health promotion international · 2024Article
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
Abstract
Despite growing awareness of the importance of commercial determinants of health (CDoH), there has been limited development or evaluation of educational and practice-focused support for public health professionals. This article reports findings from an action-research approach bringing together people with academic and practice expertise (n = 16) to co-create workshop materials (called 'CDoH Essentials'), test and improve them through five trial workshops and explore their effects. Five English local public health teams co-facilitated the workshops in their organizations, with participants from public health teams and their internal partners (n = 94). Quantitative and qualitative data were collected throughout and analysed to understand: (1) whether the workshops met the expectations of participants, public health and academic observers, and (2) the effects of workshop participation on (a) participants' knowledge, understanding and critical CDoH literacy, and (b) subsequent working practices and attitudes. The co-created CDoH Essentials appeared effective in meeting expectations, improving knowledge and critical CDoH literacy and promoting action on CDoH. The proportion of participants reporting 'little' or 'no' CDoH knowledge fell significantly following the workshop (55.4% vs 2.7%). Participants' increased understanding supported reflection on the implications of the CDoH for their roles and for wider strategy and action. After 3 months, all five settings reported greater consideration of CDoH and had initiated or planned action. CDoH Essentials could be used to galvanize more effective public health action to tackle the CDoH in England and trialled in other public health contexts.
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.