Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40017135›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2025

Centering Equity in Evidence-Informed Decision Making: Theoretical and Practical Considerations.

Bomi Kim Hirsch, Kiersten Frobom, Gillian Giglierano, Michael C Stevenson, Marjory L Givens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

5 authors.

Bomi Kim HirschUniversity of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison.ORCID 0000-0002-5412-4354
Kiersten FrobomUniversity of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Gillian GiglieranoUniversity of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Michael C StevensonUniversity of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison.ORCID 0000-0001-8511-2666
Marjory L GivensUniversity of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Funding

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Policy Points The population health research field should develop a synthesized approach to evaluate evidence for an intervention's potential impact on equity. When empirical evidence is lacking, theory and frameworks should guide the equity assessments in four areas: 1) understanding historical context, meaning root causes of disparities and inequity; 2) understanding intervention design and intended beneficiaries; 3) understanding differential impact and intersectionality; and 4) understanding community context before implementing or scaling interventions. The synthesized approach of equity assessment better informs practitioners and policymakers in evidence-based decision making to advance equity.

Indexed as

Decision MakingHealth EquityEvidence-Based MedicineEvidence-Based PracticeHealth PolicyHumansequity assessmentevidence‐informed decision makinghealth equity

Identifiers

PMID40017135
PMCPMC11923710

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.