Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41074911›Full record

ReviewJournal of internal medicine2025

Health inequalities in the Nordic countries: A comparative overview and update.

Johan Fritzell, Stefan Fors

Abstract readReviewComparative Study
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of internal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  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

2 authors.

Johan FritzellAging Research Center, Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0496-3085
Stefan ForsAging Research Center, Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, we present the state-of-the-art on socioeconomic health inequalities with a focus on the Nordic countries. Health inequalities have increased over time and can be observed for both mortality and morbidity. We show that cross-national comparisons reveal surprisingly high inequalities in the Nordic countries. It is now well established that health and mortality inequalities prevail also at older ages. We show, with data from Sweden, that the interpretation of how mortality inequalities evolve over the life course is markedly different depending on whether we focus on absolute or relative inequalities. Although there is a consensus on basic descriptive facts, disagreements on how these facts are best explained and why they persist and even increase remain. We present a general discussion on how to explain health inequalities, as well as a discussion on why patterns may differ between European regions and across the life course. We introduce a framework for understanding health inequalities, fundamental cause theory and discuss to what extent the evidence aligns with the theory. We review contemporary discussions on health inequalities in light of recent evidence based on novel methods for causal inference. We argue that health inequalities have important ramifications for population health regardless of whether they are primarily shaped by social causation or social selection and end by noting that as modern societies aspire to become more meritocratic, it is possible that socioeconomic position becomes increasingly important for health.

Indexed as

Health InequitiesHealth Status DisparitiesHumansMortalityScandinavian and Nordic CountriesSocioeconomic FactorsSwedencross‐national comparisonshealth inequalitiesmortalityNordic countriessocioeconomic

Identifiers

PMID41074911
PMCPMC12617473

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.