ArticleBMJ open2026
Policy monitoring indexes targeting non-communicable diseases: protocol for a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCost-effective and feasible policy actions to prevent non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are identified, for example, WHO's Best buys. Monitoring implementation of policy action can be a key indicator of progress in NCD prevention. Several policy monitoring indices have been developed to assess policies targeting NCDs. The objective of this scoping review is to map and synthesise scientific publications and relevant grey literature reporting on the design, characteristics and use of such indexes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The scoping review will follow Johanna Briggs Institute guidance and reporting will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews. We will search eight databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Global Health, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus and FRANCIS) from 1 January 2013 onwards for eligible observational, quasi-experimental and mixed-methods studies in any language and reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews. Criteria for studies to be included are as follows: Population-any composite index designed to monitor the implementation of NCD relevant policies; Concept-monitoring, that is, the systematic collection, analysis and use of data targeting the implementation of policies aimed at reducing the prevalence of major NCDs and/or related behavioural risk factors; Context-national and/or supranational government-initiated policies implemented within the WHO European region. Conceptual-only papers, commentaries, conference abstracts, editorials and letters will be excluded. Screening and data extraction will be done in duplicate. Results will be synthesised narratively using descriptive statistics and visuals. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because the review does not involve primary data collection or direct interaction with human participants. The review is part of the Joint Action PreventNCD project, co-funded by the European Commission and involving 25 European countries. It will contribute to the project's objectives of advancing monitoring systems for NCDs and behavioural risk factors. We plan to disseminate findings at international conferences and to publish the full review in an international peer-reviewed journal.
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.