Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40018143›Full record

ArticleBMJ public health2024

Development of an overarching framework for anticipating and assessing adverse and other unintended consequences of public health interventions (CONSEQUENT): a best-fit framework synthesis.

Jan M Stratil, Renke L Biallas, Ani Movsisyan, Kathryn Oliver, Eva A Rehfuess

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Promoting informed health choices: the long and winding road.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

Jan M StratilPettenkofer School of Public Health, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7905-0558
Renke L BiallasPettenkofer School of Public Health, Munich, Germany.
Ani MovsisyanPettenkofer School of Public Health, Munich, Germany.
Kathryn OliverFaculty of Public Health Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Eva A RehfuessPettenkofer School of Public Health, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Despite the best intentions and intended beneficial outcomes, public health (PH) interventions can have adverse effects and other unintended consequences (AUCs). AUCs are rarely systematically examined when developing, evaluating or implementing PH interventions. We, therefore, used a multipronged, evidence-based approach to develop a framework to support researchers and decision-makers in anticipating and assessing AUCs of PH interventions. Methods: We employed the 'best-fit' synthesis approach, starting with an a priori framework and iteratively revising this based on systematically identified evidence. The a priori framework was designed using key elements of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel, to root it in global health norms and values, established mechanisms of PH interventions and a complexity perspective. The a priori framework was advanced based on theoretical and conceptual publications and systematic reviews on the topic of AUCs in PH. Thematic analysis was used to revise the framework and identify new themes. To test the framework, it was coded against four systematic reviews of AUCs of PH interventions. Results: The Cosequences of Public Health Interventions (CONSEQUENT) framework includes two components: the first focuses on AUCs and serves to categorise them; the second (supplementary) component highlights the mechanisms through which AUCs may arise. The first component comprises eight domains of consequences: health, health system, human rights, acceptability and adherence, equality, and equity, social and institutional, economic and resources, and the environment. Conclusion: The CONSEQUENT framework is intended to facilitate classification and conceptualisation of AUCs of PH interventions during their development or evaluation to support evidence-informed decision-making.

Indexed as

HumansPatient HarmPublic HealthPublic Health Practice

Identifiers

PMID40018143
PMCPMC11812752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.