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.
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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Unintended Consequences of COVID-19 Public Health and Social Measures in Camps and Camp-Like Settings: A Systematic Review and Conceptual Analysis.Public health reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Harms and Negative or Unintended Consequences of Social Prescribing: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Beyond health: a systematic review of cross-sector economic implications of school-based mental health programmes in Europe.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- The dark side of streaking: Examining the backfire potential of run streaking in recreational runners who broke a long-term streak.PloS one · 2026Article
- 20-minute neighbourhoods, criticisms, conspiracy theories, and health: a critical discourse analysis.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Promoting informed health choices: the long and winding road.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2025Article
- [Status, classification, and potential of implementation research: an inventory for public health in Germany].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025Review
- How is health equity considered in policy evaluations employing quasi-experimental methods? A scoping review and content analysis.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- How do BMI-restrictive policies impact women seeking NHS-funded IVF in the United Kingdom? A qualitative analysis of online forum discussions.Reproductive health · 2024Article
- Evaluator's alignment as an important indicator of adequacy of the criteria and assessment procedure for recognizing the good practice in public health.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- A qualitative investigation of gender-based violence prevention and response using digital technologies in low resource settings and refugee populations.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2024Article
- Public health and social measures during health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic: An initial framework to conceptualize and classify measures.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.