Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42479351›Full record

ArticleJournal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine2026

Evaluating the Healthy Cities initiative: A scoping review of process evaluations.

Michelle Amri, Makda Habtegergesa, Safa Ali, Jan Filart, Geneviève Jessiman-Perreault, Kathryn Barrett, Theodore D Cosco, Jesse B Bump

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Michelle AmriThe W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. michelle.amri@ubc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6692-3340
Makda HabtegergesaDepartment of Political Science, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-2642-2249
Safa AliSchool of Public Health and Social Policy, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7115-2755
Jan FilartFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-5710-4300
Geneviève Jessiman-PerreaultDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2755-7891
Kathryn BarrettUniversity of Toronto Scarborough Library, Scarborough, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7940-2816
Theodore D CoscoSchool of Public Policy, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9977-8888
Jesse B BumpTakemi Program in International Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1014-0456

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Healthy Cities initiative, initially a grassroots movement and later adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO), is a health promotion approach that was developed primarily to increase municipal governments' capacities to address citizen health. The Healthy Cities initiative aims to incorporate health within urban policymaking through local intersectoral, community-driven collaboration. Given that the Healthy Cities movement has been underway for several decades, understanding how the Healthy Cities initiative itself has been evaluated is important. This is particularly timely given recent major shifts in global health governance, including funding cuts at the WHO that may have repercussions for efficiency and results. In this study, we investigate how Healthy Cities projects have been evaluated over the years. We conducted a scoping review reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). We searched for both peer-reviewed and grey literature in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, SCOPUS, and the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing (IRIS) from database inception to the date the search was conducted. Our scoping review identified 2206 non-duplicate results for screening, which yielded a total of 95 texts evaluating the Healthy Cities initiative conducted across 57 unique settings that met the inclusion criteria. We present our findings according to regional distribution, evaluation methods, and focus of evaluations. The distribution of evaluations across regions varied significantly, with certain locations serving as focal points for research activity, such as the WHO European Healthy Cities Network. The widespread use of surveys and interviews underscores the emphasis on capturing both quantitative and qualitative dimensions in assessing the Healthy Cities initiative. Although the strong representation of themes such as implementation approach, community participation, and policy development reflects a clear focus on implementation, engagement, and policy outcomes, the underrepresentation of themes such as intersectoral collaboration and capacity building points to areas requiring greater attention.

Indexed as

Health PromotionUrban HealthCitiesHumansProgram EvaluationWorld Health OrganizationGlobal healthHealth equityHealth promotionHealthy citiesHealthy cities initiativeHealthy communitiesHealthy islandsHealthy municipalitiesPolicy developmentProcess evaluationScoping reviewUrban healthUrban health governanceWHOWorld health organization

Identifiers

PMID42479351
PMCPMC13524892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.