Dataset Information

What kinds of policies to reduce health inequalities in the UK do researchers support?

ABSTRACT: Despite a wealth of research and policy initiatives, progress in tackling the UK's health inequalities has been limited. This article explores whether there appears to be consensus among researchers about the kinds of policies likely to reduce health inequalities.Ninety-nine proposals for addressing health inequalities were identified from multiple sources. Forty-one researchers participated in a survey assessing the extent to which they believed each proposal would reduce health inequalities, based on three criteria. The 20 proposals generating most support were employed in a second stage, in which 92 researchers indicated which proposals they felt would have the greatest impact on reducing health inequalities.Some consensus exists among researchers about the policy approaches likely to reduce UK health inequalities: a more progressive distribution of income/wealth, greater investment in services for deprived communities, plus regulatory policies to limit the impact of lifestyle-behavioural risks. However, researchers' support for proposals varies depending whether they are asked to express their expert opinion or to comment on the strength of the available evidence.When consulting researchers about health inequalities, policymakers need to consider whether they are seeking research-informed expertise or assessments of the available evidence; these questions are likely to yield different responses.

SUBMITTER: Smith KE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4340326 | biostudies-other | 2015 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What kinds of policies to reduce health inequalities in the UK do researchers support?

Smith Katherine E KE Kandlik Eltanani Mor M

Journal of public health (Oxford, England) 20140830 1

<h4>Background</h4>Despite a wealth of research and policy initiatives, progress in tackling the UK's health inequalities has been limited. This article explores whether there appears to be consensus among researchers about the kinds of policies likely to reduce health inequalities.<h4>Methods</h4>Ninety-nine proposals for addressing health inequalities were identified from multiple sources. Forty-one researchers participated in a survey assessing the extent to which they believed each proposal ...[more]

PMID: 25174045

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIncreasing patient engagement in healthcare has become a health policy priority. However, there has been concern that promoting supported shared decision-making could increase health inequalities.ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on disadvantaged groups and health inequalities.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies.Data sourcesCINAHL, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, HMIC, MEDLINE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Open SIGLE, PsycINFO and Web of Knowledge were searched from inception until June 2012.Study eligibility criteriaWe included all studies, without language restriction, that met the following two criteria: (1) assess the effect of shared decision-making interventions on disadvantaged groups and/or health inequalities, (2) include at least 50% of people from disadvantaged groups, except if a separate analysis was conducted for this group.ResultsWe included 19 studies and pooled 10 in a meta-analysis. The meta-analyses showed a moderate positive effect of shared decision-making interventions on disadvantaged patients. The narrative synthesis suggested that, overall, SDM interventions increased knowledge, informed choice, participation in decision-making, decision self-efficacy, preference for collaborative decision making and reduced decisional conflict among disadvantaged patients. Further, 7 out of 19 studies compared the intervention's effect between high and low literacy groups. Overall, SDM interventions seemed to benefit disadvantaged groups (e.g. lower literacy) more than those with higher literacy, education and socioeconomic status. Interventions that were tailored to disadvantaged groups' needs appeared most effective.ConclusionResults indicate that shared decision-making interventions significantly improve outcomes for disadvantaged patients. According to the narrative synthesis, SDM interventions may be more beneficial to disadvantaged groups than higher literacy/socioeconomic status patients. However, given the small sample sizes and variety in the intervention types, study design and quality, those findings should be interpreted with caution.

Project description:IntroductionUK countries implemented smoke-free public places legislation and increased the legal age for tobacco purchase from 16 to 18 years between 2006 and 2008. We evaluated the immediate and long-term impacts of these UK policy changes on youth smoking uptake and inequalities therein.Aims and methodsWe studied 74 960 person-years of longitudinal data from 14 992 youths (aged 11-15 years) in annual UK household surveys between 1994 and 2016. Discrete-time event history analyses examined whether changes in rates of youth smoking transitions (initiation, experimentation, and escalation to daily smoking or quitting) or their inequalities (by parental education) were associated with policy implementation. Parallel analyses examined smoke-free legislation and the change in legal age. We interpret the results as a combined effect of the two pieces of legislation as their implementation dates were too close to identify separate effects. Models were adjusted for sex, age, UK country, historical year, tobacco taxation, and e-cigarette prevalence, with multiple imputation for missing data.ResultsFor both policies, smoking initiation reduced following implementation (change in legal age odds ratio [OR]: 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55 to 0.81; smoke-free legislation OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.82), while inequalities in initiation narrowed over subsequent years. The legal age change was associated with annual increases in progression from initiation to occasional smoking (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.50) and a reduction in quitting following implementation (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.94). Similar effects were observed for smoke-free legislation but CIs overlapped the null.ConclusionsPolicies such as these may be highly effective in preventing and reducing socioeconomic inequalities in youth smoking initiation.ImplicationsUK implementation of smoke-free legislation and an increase in the legal age for tobacco purchase from 16 to 18 years were associated with an immediate reduction in smoking initiation and a narrowing of inequalities in initiation over subsequent years. While the policies were associated with reductions in the initiation, progression to occasional smoking increased and quitting decreased following the legislation.

Dataset Information

What kinds of policies to reduce health inequalities in the UK do researchers support?

Publications

What kinds of policies to reduce health inequalities in the UK do researchers support?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets