Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40177074›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025

Exploring methods to assess environmental health inequalities in health impact assessments of local interventions: a systematic review within the JA PreventNCD project.

Sara Properzi, Angela Andrea Coa, Claudio Fiorilla, Roberto Pasetto

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Sara ProperziDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Angela Andrea CoaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Claudio FiorillaDepartment of Public Health, "Federico II" University, Naples, Italy.
Roberto PasettoUnit of Environmental and Social Epidemiology, Department of Environment and Health, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Health Impact Assessment (HIA) procedures can include the assessment of inequalities and inequities associated with the distribution of environmental health risks and benefits, aimed at attenuating the exacerbation of environmental health disparities. This systematic review, conducted as part of the Joint Action Prevent Non-Communicable Diseases initiative, explores methods for assessing health inequalities and equity within HIA frameworks, particularly in local projects affecting the distribution of environmental risks and benefits. Methods: Adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted using the MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases, searching until March 8, 2024. Furthermore, a grey literature analysis encompassed the Institutional Repository for Information Sharing (IRIS) of the World Health Organization, to identify guidelines and recommendations addressing equity considerations in HIAs. Studies were included based on predefined eligibility criteria if they explored issues related to inequalities, inequities, and vulnerabilities within the context of HIAs. Data extraction focused on methodologies that incorporated equity considerations within the HIA framework, particularly concerning local urban planning initiatives, transport infrastructure, and industrial settings. Results: A total of 33 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among these, eight documents from the grey literature, identified as guidelines and guidance, underscored the importance of prioritizing equity to ensure that health impacts are addressed fairly across diverse population groups. The remaining 25 peer-reviewed studies employed a combination of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Quantitative approaches, including exposure-response modeling and Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping, were utilized to evaluate spatial and demographic health disparities. Qualitative methods, such as focus groups, interviews, and participatory tools, provided insights into the lived experiences of vulnerable populations affected by local interventions. Studies addressing urban and transportation planning predominantly emphasized socioeconomic stratification, whereas those focused on industrial settings highlighted occupational hazards and community vulnerabilities. Conclusion: This review highlights the diverse and fragmented approaches used to address health inequalities and equity in HIA. It underscores the need for interdisciplinary and systematic methodologies that integrate quantitative and qualitative perspectives, ensuring equity remains a central consideration in policymaking and project implementation. Finally, it proposes a practical framework for integrating equity into HIA.

Indexed as

Environmental HealthHealth Impact AssessmentHealth Status DisparitiesHumansenvironmental justicehealth impact assessmentinequalitiesinequitiesJA PreventNCDlocal interventionvulnerabilities

Identifiers

PMID40177074
PMCPMC11961916

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.