ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2025
EQUALSS GUIDE Multiple: A novel framework for equity-focused evidence synthesis.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions to reduce pain at dressing change of chronic wounds: a mixed-methods systematic review.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Narrative systematic review for autism spectrum disorders screening tools in school settings.BMJ open · 2026Pooled it
- What works to address inequalities in primary care: Development of Living Evidence Maps using machine learning.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- PRO EDI-A Tool to Help Systematic Reviewers Make Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Assessments.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Article
- Incorporating an equity perspective in systematic reviews of interventions: potential methodological approaches.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2026Review
- Understanding Responsible Development in AI-Based Clinical Prediction Models for Mortality: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Development of the Kunonga framework for operationalising approaches to health inequality and/or inequity evidence syntheses.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Improving the reporting on health equity in observational research (STROBE-Equity): extension checklist and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Writing about health inequality: recommendations for accurate and impactful presentation of evidence.International journal for equity in health · 2025Review
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
Background: Understanding the differential effects of health and care interventions across disadvantaged groups is essential in addressing inequalities and avoiding inadvertently worsening them. Previous research has highlighted limitations with the existing PROGRESS-Plus framework. We aimed to develop a framework to allow researchers to synthesise evidence with an equity perspective. Methods: First, we re-analysed articles from the EQUALISE study, a review of interventions that increase or decrease inequalities in general practice, to explore the various domains of disadvantage examined in the included studies. We then compared these domains of disadvantage with the existing PROGRESS-Plus framework. Finally, we propose a new framework to support equity-focused evidence synthesis. Findings: From the 325 studies included in EQUALISE, the most commonly assessed PROGRESS-Plus domains were sex/gender (53%), ethnicity/race (50%), and age (44%). The PROGRESS-Plus framework did not include explict mention of context-specific groups, those with multiple intersecting disadvantage, and people who experience disability. Building on PROGRESS-Plus, our new framework EQUALSS GUIDE Multiple includes: Ethnicity and race, Qualifications and education, Underserved area, Age, Language and religion, Sex, Sexual orientation, Gender identification, Underrepresented groups (inclusion groups), Income and wealth, Disability (physical, mental and learning), Employment and occupation, and Multiple disadvantage. Interpretation: EQUALSS GUIDE Multiple builds on PROGRESS-Plus to encapsulate key domains of disadvantage while allowing for context-specific flexibility. Examining the effectiveness of policy and practice interventions by disadvantaged groups is paramount to prioritise actions that narrow the health gap and prevent actions which widen inequalities.
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.