Dataset Information

Nordic research on health inequalities: A scoping review of empirical studies published in Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 2000-2021.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

An important task for the Scandinavian Journal of Public Health is to address health inequality topics. This scoping review characterises Nordic empirical studies within this research field, published 2000-2021 by the Scandinavian Journal of Public Health.

Methods

Original empirical research studies using data from Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and/or Sweden, which linked differences in health or health-related aspects to socioeconomic positions, immigrant status, family structures and/or residential areas, were included in the review. The initial search in the Web of Science article database resulted in 294 possibly relevant articles, and 171 were judged to comply with our criteria.

Results

Only one study was based on qualitative data, while all others used either surveys or register data, or both in combination. A wide variety of outcomes was addressed. Most studies had a social causation design, but 16 studies analysed health-related mobility processes and four reported intervention results. The most common statistical method was logistic regression. Poisson, Cox and ordinary least squares regression were less used. Few studies engaged explicitly with health inequality theories or with rigorous causality designs.

Conclusions

SUBMITTER: Elstad JI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9578093 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nordic research on health inequalities: A scoping review of empirical studies published in <i>Scandinavian Journal of Public Health</i> 2000-2021.

Elstad Jon Ivar JI Heggebø Kristian K Dahl Espen E

Scandinavian journal of public health 20220622 7

<h4>Aims</h4>An important task for the <i>Scandinavian Journal of Public Health</i> is to address health inequality topics. This scoping review characterises Nordic empirical studies within this research field, published 2000-2021 by the <i>Scandinavian Journal of Public Health</i>.<h4>Methods</h4>Original empirical research studies using data from Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and/or Sweden, which linked differences in health or health-related aspects to socioeconomic positions, immigrant s ...[more]

PMID: 35731011

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAs production of rapid reviews (RRs) increases in healthcare, knowing how to efficiently convey RR evidence to various end-users is important given they are often intended to directly inform decision-making. Little is known about how often RRs are produced in the published or unpublished domains, and what and how information is structured.ObjectivesTo compare and contrast report format and content features of journal-published (JP) and non-journal published (NJP) RRs.MethodsJP RRs were identified from key databases, and NJP RRs were identified from a grey literature search of 148 RR producing organizations and were sampled proportionate to cluster size by organization and product type to match the JP RR group. We extracted and formally compared 'how' (i.e., visual arrangement) and 'what' information was presented.ResultsWe identified 103 RRs (52 JP and 51 NJP) from 2016. A higher percentage of certain features were observed in JP RRs compared to NJP RRs (e.g., reporting authors; use of a traditional journal article structure; section headers including abstract, methods, discussion, conclusions, acknowledgments, conflict of interests, and author contributions; and use of figures (e.g., Study Flow Diagram) in the main document). For NJP RRs, a higher percentage of features were observed (e.g., use non-traditional report structures; bannering of executive summary sections and appendices; use of typographic cues; and including outcome tables). NJP RRs were more than double in length versus JP RRs. Including key messages was uncommon in both groups.ConclusionsThis comparative study highlights differences between JP and NJP RRs. Both groups may benefit from better use of plain language, and more clear and concise design. Alternative innovative formats and end-user preferences for content and layout should be studied further with thought given to other considerations to ensure better packaging of RR results to facilitate uptake into policy and practice.Study registrationThe full protocol is available at: https://osf.io/29xvk/.

Project description:BackgroundInfluenza poses a major public health challenge in South-East Asia Region (SEAR). To address the challenge, there is a need to generate contextual evidence that could inform policy makers and program managers for response preparedness and impact mitigation. The World Health Organization has identified priority areas across five streams for research evidence generation at a global level (WHO Public Health Research Agenda). Stream 1 focuses on research for reducing the risk of emergence, Stream 2 on limiting the spread, Stream 3 on minimizing the impact, Stream 4 on optimizing the treatment and Stream 5 on promoting public health tools and technologies for Influenza. However, evidence generation from SEAR has been arguably low and needs a relook for alignment with priorities. This study aimed to undertake a bibliometric analysis of medical literature on Influenza over the past 21 years to identify gaps in research evidence and for identifying major areas for focusing with a view to provide recommendations to member states and SEAR office for prioritizing avenues for future research.MethodsWe searched Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases in August 2021. We identified studies on influenza published from the 11 countries in WHO SEAR in the date range of 1 January 2000-31 December 2021. Data was retrieved, tagged and analyzed based on the WHO priority streams for Influenza, member states, study design and type of research. Bibliometric analysis was done on Vosviewer.FindingsWe included a total of 1,641 articles (Stream 1: n = 307; Stream 2: n = 516; Stream 3: n = 470; Stream 4: n = 309; Stream 5: n = 227). Maximum number of publications were seen in Stream 2, i.e., limiting the spread of pandemic, zoonotic, and seasonal epidemic influenza which majorly included transmission, spread of virus at global and local levels and public health measures to limit the transmission. The highest number of publications was from India (n = 524) followed by Thailand (n = 407), Indonesia (n = 214) and Bangladesh (n = 158). Bhutan (n = 10), Maldives (n = 1), Democratic People's Republic of Korea (n = 1), and Timor-Leste (n = 3) had the least contribution in Influenza research. The top-most journal was PloS One which had the maximum number of influenza articles (n = 94) published from SEAR countries. Research that generated actionable evidence, i.e., implementation and intervention related topics were less common. Similarly, research on pharmaceutical interventions and on innovations was low. SEAR member states had inconsistent output across the five priority research streams, and there was a much higher scope and need for collaborative research. Basic science research showed declining trends and needed reprioritization.InterpretationWhile a priority research agenda has been set for influenza at the global level through the WHO Global Influenza Program since 2009, and subsequently revisited in 2011 and again in 2016-2017, a structured contextualized approach to guide actionable evidence generation activities in SEAR has been lacking. In the backset of the Global Influenza Strategy 2019-2030 and the COVID-19 pandemic, attuning research endeavors in SEAR could help in improved pandemic influenza preparedness planning. There is a need to prioritize contextually relevant research themes within priority streams. Member states must inculcate a culture of within and inter-country collaboration to produce evidence that has regional as well as global value.

Project description:BackgroundNumerous studies have explored the most productive and influential authors in a specific field. However, 2 challenges arise when conducting such research. First, some authors may have identical names in the study data, and second, the contributions of coauthors may vary in the article by line, requiring consideration. Failure to address these issues may result in biased research findings. Our objective was to illustrate how the author-weighted scheme (AWS) and betweenness centrality (BC) can be employed to identify the 10 most frequently cited authors in a particular journal and analyze their research themes.MethodsWe collected 24,058 abstracts from the PubMed library between 2000 and 2020 using the keyword "Medicine [Journal]." Author names, countries/regions, and medical subject headings (MeSH terms) were collected. The AWS to identify the top 10 authors with a higher x-index was applied. To address the issue of authors with identical names affiliated with different research institutes, we utilized the BC method. Social network analysis (SNA) was conducted, and 10 major clusters were identified to highlight authors with a higher x-index within the corresponding clusters. We utilized SNA to analyze the MeSH terms from articles of the 10 top-cited authors to identify their research themes.ResultsOur findings revealed the following: within the top 10 cited authors, 2 authors from China shared identical names with Jing Li and Tao-Wang; JA Winkelstein from Maryland (US) had the highest x-index (15.58); Chia-Hung Kao from Taiwan was the most prolific author, having published 115 articles in Medicine since 2003; and the 3 primary research themes, namely, complications, etiology, and epidemiology, were identified using MeSH terms from the 10 most frequently cited authors.ConclusionsUsing AWS and BC, we identified the top 10 most cited authors. The research methods we utilized in this study (BC and AWS) have the potential to be applied to other bibliometric analyses in the future.