The Experts below are selected from a list of 61398 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sharon Friel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
advancing a Health Equity agenda across multiple policy domains a qualitative policy analysis of social trade and welfare policy
BMJ Open, 2020Co-Authors: Belinda Townsend, Sharon Friel, Toby Freeman, Ashley Schram, Lyndall Strazdins, Ronald Labonte, Tamara Mackean, Fran BaumAbstract:Objective While there is urgent need for policymaking that prioritises Health Equity, successful strategies for advancing such an agenda across multiple policy sectors are not well known. This study aims to address this gap by identifying successful strategies to advance a Health Equity agenda across multiple policy domains. Design We conducted in-depth qualitative case studies in three important social determinants of Health Equity in Australia: employment and social policy (Paid Parental Leave); macroeconomics and trade policy (the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement); and welfare reform (the Northern Territory Emergency Response). The analysis triangulated multiple data sources included 71 semistructured interviews, document analysis and drew on political science theories related to interests, ideas and institutions. Results Within and across case studies we observed three key strategies used by policy actors to advance a Health Equity agenda, with differing levels of success. The first was the use of multiple policy frames to appeal to a wide range of actors beyond Health. The second was the formation of broad coalitions beyond the Health sector, in particular networking with non-traditional policy allies. The third was the use of strategic forum shopping by policy actors to move the debate into more popular policy forums that were not Health focused. Conclusions This analysis provides nuanced strategies for agenda-setting for Health Equity and points to the need for multiple persuasive issue frames, coalitions with unusual bedfellows, and shopping around for supportive institutions outside the traditional Health domain. Use of these nuanced strategies could generate greater ideational, actor and institutional support for prioritising Health Equity and thus could lead to improved Health outcomes.
-
toward a research and action agenda on urban planning design and Health Equity in cities in low and middle income countries
Journal of Urban Health-bulletin of The New York Academy of Medicine, 2011Co-Authors: Warren Smit, Trevor Hancock, Jacob Kumaresen, Carlos Santosburgoa, Raul Sanchezkobashi Meneses, Sharon FrielAbstract:The importance of reestablishing the link between urban planning and public Health has been recognized in recent decades; this paper focuses on the relationship between urban planning/design and Health Equity, especially in cities in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). The physical urban environment can be shaped through various planning and design processes including urban planning, urban design, landscape architecture, infrastructure design, architecture, and transport planning. The resultant urban environment has important impacts on the Health of the people who live and work there. Urban planning and design processes can also affect Health Equity through shaping the extent to which the physical urban environments of different parts of cities facilitate the availability of adequate housing and basic infrastructure, equitable access to the other benefits of urban life, a safe living environment, a Healthy natural environment, food security and Healthy nutrition, and an urban environment conducive to outdoor physical activity. A new research and action agenda for the urban environment and Health Equity in LMICs should consist of four main components. We need to better understand intra-urban Health inequities in LMICs; we need to better understand how changes in the built environment in LMICs affect Health Equity; we need to explore ways of successfully planning, designing, and implementing improved Health/Health Equity; and we need to develop evidence-based recommendations for Healthy urban planning/design in LMICs.
-
global Health Equity and climate stabilisation a common agenda
The Lancet, 2008Co-Authors: Michael Marmot, Sharon Friel, Anthony J Mcmichael, Tord Kjellstrom, Denny VageroAbstract:Although Health has improved for many people, the extent of Health inequities between and within countries is growing. Meanwhile, humankind is disrupting the global climate and other life-supporting environmental systems, thereby creating serious risks for Health and wellbeing, especially in vulnerable populations but ultimately for everybody. Underlying determinants of Health inEquity and environmental change overlap substantially; they are signs of an economic system predicated on asymmetric growth and competition, shaped by market forces that mostly disregard Health and environmental consequences rather than by values of fairness and support. A shift is needed in priorities in economic development towards Healthy forms of urbanisation, more efficient and renewable energy sources, and a sustainable and fairer food system. Global interconnectedness and interdependence enable the social and environmental determinants of Health to be addressed in ways that will increase Health Equity, reduce poverty, and build societies that live within environmental limits.
-
closing the gap in a generation Health Equity through action on the social determinants of Health
The Lancet, 2008Co-Authors: Michael Marmot, Sharon Friel, Ruth Bell, Tanja A J Houweling, Sebastian TaylorAbstract:Michael Marmot, Sharon Friel, Ruth Bell, Tanja A J Houweling, SebastianTaylor, on behalf of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health The Commission on Social Determinants of Health, created to marshal the evidence on what can be done to promote Health Equity and to foster a global movement to achieve it, is a global collaboration of policy makers, researchers, and civil society, led by commissioners with a unique blend of political, academic, and advocacy experience. The focus of attention is on countries at all levels of income and development. The commission launched its fi nal report on August 28, 2008. This paper summarises the key fi ndings and recommendations; the full list is in the fi nal report.
Perry L Lang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
achieving Health Equity through community engagement in translating evidence to policy the san francisco Health improvement partnership 2010 2016
Preventing Chronic Disease, 2017Co-Authors: Kevin Grumbach, Roberto Ariel Vargas, Paula Fleisher, Tomas J Aragon, Lisa H Chung, Colleen Chawla, Abbie Yant, Estela R Garcia, Amor Santiago, Perry L LangAbstract:Author(s): Grumbach, Kevin; Vargas, Roberto A; Fleisher, Paula; Aragon, Tomas J; Chung, Lisa; Chawla, Colleen; Yant, Abbie; Garcia, Estela R; Santiago, Amor; Lang, Perry L; Jones, Paula; Liu, Wylie; Schmidt, Laura A | Abstract: BackgroundThe San Francisco Health Improvement Partnership (SFHIP) promotes Health Equity by using a novel collective impact model that blends community engagement with evidence-to-policy translational science. The model involves diverse stakeholders, including ethnic-based community Health Equity coalitions, the local public Health department, hospitals and Health systems, a Health sciences university, a school district, the faith community, and others sectors.Community contextWe report on 3 SFHIP prevention initiatives: reducing consumption of sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs), regulating retail alcohol sales, and eliminating disparities in children's oral Health.MethodsSFHIP is governed by a steering committee. Partnership working groups for each initiative collaborate to 1) develop and implement action plans emphasizing feasible, scalable, translational-science-informed interventions and 2) consider sustainability early in the planning process by including policy and structural interventions.OutcomeThrough SFHIP's efforts, San Francisco enacted ordinances regulating sale and advertising of SSBs and a ballot measure establishing a soda tax. Most San Francisco hospitals implemented or committed to implementing Healthy-beverage policies that prohibited serving or selling SSBs. SFHIP helped prevent Starbucks and Taco Bell from receiving alcohol licenses in San Francisco and helped prevent state authorization of sale of powdered alcohol. SFHIP increased the number of primary care clinics providing fluoride varnish at routine well-child visits from 3 to 14 and acquired a state waiver to allow dental clinics to be paid for dental services delivered in schools.InterpretationThe SFHIP model of collective impact emphasizing community engagement and policy change accomplished many of its intermediate goals to create an environment promoting Health and Health Equity.
Vivian Welch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
consort Equity 2017 extension and elaboration for better reporting of Health Equity in randomised trials
BMJ, 2017Co-Authors: Vivian Welch, Janet Jull, Ole Frithjof Norheim, Richard Cookson, Halvor Sommerfelt, Peter TugwellAbstract:We outline CONSORT-Equity 2017 reporting standards, an extension to the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement that aims to improve the reporting of intervention effects in randomised trials where Health Equity is relevant. Health inequities are unfair differences in Health that can be avoided by reasonable action. We defined a randomised trial where Health Equity is relevant as one that assesses effects on Health Equity by evaluating an intervention focused on people experiencing social disadvantage or by exploring the difference in the effect of the intervention between two groups (or as a gradient across more than two groups) experiencing different levels of social disadvantage, or both. We held a consensus meeting with diverse potential users from high, middle, and low income countries, including knowledge users such as patients and methodologists. We discussed evidence for each proposed extension item from empirical studies, reviews, key informant interviews, and an online survey, aiming to improve clarity of reporting without imposing undue burden on authors. The new guidance contains Equity extensions to 16 items from CONSORT 2010 plus one new item on research ethics reporting, with examples of good practice and a brief explanation and elaboration for each. Widespread uptake of this guidance for the reporting of trials where Health Equity is relevant will make it easier for decision makers to find and use evidence from randomised trials to reduce unfair inequalities in Health.
-
grade Equity guidelines 2 considering Health Equity in grade guideline development Equity extension of the guideline development checklist
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2017Co-Authors: Elie A Akl, Vivian Welch, Kevin Pottie, Javier Eslavaschmalbach, Andrea Darzi, Ivan Sola, Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi, Jasvinder A SinghAbstract:Abstract Objective To provide guidance for guideline developers on how to consider Health Equity at key stages of the guideline development process. Study Design and Setting Literature review followed by group discussions and consensus building. Results The key stages at which guideline developers could consider Equity include setting priorities, guideline group membership, identifying the target audience(s), generating the guideline questions, considering the importance of outcomes and interventions, deciding what evidence to include and searching for evidence, summarizing the evidence and considering additional information, wording of recommendations, and evaluation and use. We provide examples of how guidelines have actually considered Equity at each of these stages. Conclusion Guideline projects should consider the aforementioned suggestions for recommendations that are Equity sensitive.
-
grade Equity guidelines 1 considering Health Equity in grade guideline development introduction and rationale
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2017Co-Authors: Vivian Welch, Elie A Akl, Gordon H Guyatt, Kevin Pottie, Javier Eslavaschmalbach, Mohammed T Ansari, Hans De Beer, Matthias Briel, Tony Dans, Inday DansAbstract:Abstract Objectives This article introduces the rationale and methods for explicitly considering Health Equity in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology for development of clinical, public Health, and Health system guidelines. Study Design and Setting We searched for guideline methodology articles, conceptual articles about Health Equity, and examples of guidelines that considered Health Equity explicitly. We held three meetings with GRADE Working Group members and invited comments from the GRADE Working Group listserve. Results We developed three articles on incorporating Equity considerations into the overall approach to guideline development, rating certainty, and assembling the evidence base and evidence to decision and/or recommendation. Conclusion Clinical and public Health guidelines have a role to play in promoting Health Equity by explicitly considering Equity in the process of guideline development.
-
grade Equity guidelines 3 considering Health Equity in grade guideline development rating the certainty of synthesized evidence
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2017Co-Authors: Vivian Welch, Elie A Akl, Kevin Pottie, Javier Eslavaschmalbach, Mohammed T Ansari, Matthias Briel, Robin Christensen, Antonio L Dans, Leonila F Dans, Gordon H GuyattAbstract:Objectives The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework for how to consider Health Equity in the Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence (GRADE) guideline development process.
-
Health Equity evidence synthesis and knowledge translation methods
Systematic Reviews, 2013Co-Authors: Vivian Welch, Mark Petticrew, Jennifer Oneill, Elizabeth Waters, Rebecca Armstrong, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Damian K Francis, Tracey Perez Koehlmoos, Elizabeth Kristjansson, Tomas PantojaAbstract:At the Rio Summit in 2011 on Social Determinants of Health, the global community recognized a pressing need to take action on reducing Health inequities. This requires an improved evidence base on the effects of national and international policies on Health inequities. Although systematic reviews are recognized as an important source for evidence-informed policy, they have been criticized for failing to assess effects on Health Equity. This article summarizes guidance on both conducting systematic reviews with a focus on Health Equity and on methods to translate their findings to different audiences. This guidance was developed based on a series of methodology meetings, previous guidance, a recently developed reporting guideline for Equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-Equity 2012) and a systematic review of methods to assess Health Equity in systematic reviews. We make ten recommendations for conducting Equity-focused systematic reviews; and five considerations for knowledge translation. Illustrative examples of Equity-focused reviews are provided where these methods have been used. Implementation of the recommendations in this article is one step toward monitoring the impact of national and international policies and programs on Health Equity, as recommended by the 2011 World Conference on Social Determinants of Health.
Maia Z Laing - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
envisioning Health Equity for american indian alaska natives a unique hit opportunity
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2019Co-Authors: Theresa Cullen, Jan Flowers, Thomas D Sequist, Howard Hays, Paul G Biondich, Maia Z LaingAbstract:The Indian Health Service provides care to remote and under-resourced communities in the United States. American Indian/Alaska Native patients have some of the highest morbidity and mortality among any ethnic group in the United States. Starting in the 1980s, the IHS implemented the Resource and Patient Management System Health information technology (HIT) platform to improve efficiency and quality to address these disparities. The IHS is currently assessing the Resource and Patient Management System to ensure that changing Health information needs are met. HIT assessments have traditionally focused on cost, reimbursement opportunities, infrastructure, required or desired functionality, and the ability to meet provider needs. Little information exists on frameworks that assess HIT legacy systems to determine solutions for an integrated rural Healthcare system whose end goal is Health Equity. This search for a next-generation HIT solution for a historically underserved population presents a unique opportunity to envision and redefine HIT that supports Health Equity as its core mission.
Kevin Grumbach - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
achieving Health Equity through community engagement in translating evidence to policy the san francisco Health improvement partnership 2010 2016
Preventing Chronic Disease, 2017Co-Authors: Kevin Grumbach, Roberto Ariel Vargas, Paula Fleisher, Tomas J Aragon, Lisa H Chung, Colleen Chawla, Abbie Yant, Estela R Garcia, Amor Santiago, Perry L LangAbstract:Author(s): Grumbach, Kevin; Vargas, Roberto A; Fleisher, Paula; Aragon, Tomas J; Chung, Lisa; Chawla, Colleen; Yant, Abbie; Garcia, Estela R; Santiago, Amor; Lang, Perry L; Jones, Paula; Liu, Wylie; Schmidt, Laura A | Abstract: BackgroundThe San Francisco Health Improvement Partnership (SFHIP) promotes Health Equity by using a novel collective impact model that blends community engagement with evidence-to-policy translational science. The model involves diverse stakeholders, including ethnic-based community Health Equity coalitions, the local public Health department, hospitals and Health systems, a Health sciences university, a school district, the faith community, and others sectors.Community contextWe report on 3 SFHIP prevention initiatives: reducing consumption of sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs), regulating retail alcohol sales, and eliminating disparities in children's oral Health.MethodsSFHIP is governed by a steering committee. Partnership working groups for each initiative collaborate to 1) develop and implement action plans emphasizing feasible, scalable, translational-science-informed interventions and 2) consider sustainability early in the planning process by including policy and structural interventions.OutcomeThrough SFHIP's efforts, San Francisco enacted ordinances regulating sale and advertising of SSBs and a ballot measure establishing a soda tax. Most San Francisco hospitals implemented or committed to implementing Healthy-beverage policies that prohibited serving or selling SSBs. SFHIP helped prevent Starbucks and Taco Bell from receiving alcohol licenses in San Francisco and helped prevent state authorization of sale of powdered alcohol. SFHIP increased the number of primary care clinics providing fluoride varnish at routine well-child visits from 3 to 14 and acquired a state waiver to allow dental clinics to be paid for dental services delivered in schools.InterpretationThe SFHIP model of collective impact emphasizing community engagement and policy change accomplished many of its intermediate goals to create an environment promoting Health and Health Equity.
