Are we producing the right kind of actionable evidence for the social determinants of health?

Intersectional inequalities in younger women's experiences of physical intimate partner violence across communities in Bangladesh

Background

Physical intimate partner violence (IPV) risk looms large for younger women in Bangladesh. We are, however, yet to know the association between their intersectional social locations and IPV across communities. Drawing on intersectionality theory’s tenet that interacting systems of power, oppressions, and privileges work together, we hypothesized that (1) younger, lower educated or poor women’s physical IPV experiences will be exacerbated in disadvantaged communities; and conversely, (2) younger, higher educated or nonpoor women’s physical IPV experiences will be ameliorated in advantaged communities.

Methods

We applied intercategorical intersectionality analyses using multilevel logistic regression models in 15,421 currently married women across 911 communities from a national, cross-sectional survey in 2015. To test the hypotheses, women’s probabilities of currently experiencing physical IPV among intersectional social groups were compared. These comparisons were made, at first, within each type of disadvantaged (e.g., younger or poor) and advantaged (e.g., older or nonpoor) communities; and then, between different types of communities.

Results

While our specific hypotheses were not supported, we found significant within community differences, suggesting that younger, lower educated or poor women were bearing the brunt of IPV in almost every community (probabilities ranged from 34.0–37.1%). Younger, poor compared to older, nonpoor women had significantly higher IPV probabilities (the minimum difference = 12.7, 95% CI, 2.8, 22.6) in all communities. Similar trend was observed between younger, lower educated compared to older, higher educated women in all except communities that were poor. Interestingly, younger women’s advantage of higher education and material resources compared to their lower educated or poor counterparts was observed only in advantaged communities. However, these within community differences did not vary between disadvantaged and advantaged communities (difference-in-differences ranged from − 0.9%, (95% CI, − 8.5, 6.7) to − 8.6%, (95% CI, − 17.6, 0.5).

Conclusions

Using intersectionality theory made visible the IPV precarity of younger, lower educated or poor women across communities. Future research might examine the structures and processes that put them at these precarious locations to ameliorate their socio-economic-educational inequalities and reduce IPV in all communities. For testing hypotheses using intersectionality theory, this study might advance scholarship on physical IPV in Bangladesh and quantitative intersectionality globally.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-021-01587-z.

Mobilising urban knowledge in an infodemic: Urban observatories, sustainable development and the COVID-19 crisis

Along with disastrous health and economic implications, COVID-19 has also been an epidemic of misinformation and rumours - an 'infodemic'. The desire for robust, evidence-based policymaking in this time of disruption has been at the heart of the multilateral response to the crisis, not least in terms of supporting a continuing agenda for global sustainable development. The role of boundary-spanning knowledge institutions in this context could be pivotal, not least in cities, where much of the pandemic has struck. 'Urban observatories' have emerged as an example of such institutions; harbouring great potential to produce and share knowledge supporting sustainable and equitable processes of recovery. Building on four 'live' case studies during the crisis of institutions based in Johannesburg, Karachi, Freetown and Bangalore, our research note aims to capture the role of these institutions, and what it means to span knowledge boundaries in the current crisis. We do so with an eye towards a better understanding of their knowledge mobilisation practices in contributing towards sustainable urban development. We highlight that the crisis offers a key window for urban observatories to play a progressive and effective role for sustainable and inclusive development. However, we also underline continuing challenges in these boundary knowledge dynamics: including issues of institutional trust, inequality of voices, collective memory, and the balance between normative and advisory roles for observatories.

Mechanisms and pathways to impact in public health research: a preliminary analysis of research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)

Background

The mechanisms and pathways to impacts from public health research in the UK have not been widely studied. Through the lens of one funder (NIHR), our aims are to map the diversity of public health research, in terms of funding mechanisms, disciplinary contributions, and public health impacts, identify examples of impacts, and pathways to impact that existing reporting mechanisms may not otherwise have captured, and provide illustrations of how public health researchers perceive the generation of non-academic impact from their work.

Methods

A total of 1386 projects were identified as ‘public health research’ by the NIHR and listed in the NIHR Public Health Overview database (2000–2016). From these, a subset of 857 projects were matched as potentially having begun reporting impacts via an external data-gathering platform (Researchfish). Data on the 857 projects were analyzed quantitatively, and nine projects were selected to investigate further through semi-structured interviews with principal investigators. Two workshops took place to validate emerging and final findings and facilitate analysis.

Results

In addition to the NIHR School for Public Health Research and the NIHR Public Health Research Programme, 89% of projects contained in the NIHR Public Health Overview portfolio as ‘public health research’ are funded via other NIHR research programmes, suggesting significant diversity in disciplines contributing to public health research and outcomes. The pathways to impact observed in our in-depth case studies include contributing to debates on what constitutes appropriate evidence for national policy change, acknowledging local ‘unintended’ impacts, building trusted relationships with stakeholders across health and non-health sectors and actors, collaborating with local authorities, and using non-academic dissemination channels.

Conclusions

Public health as a discipline contributes substantially to impact beyond academia. To support the diversity of these impacts, we need to recognise localized smaller-scale impacts, and the difference in types of evidence required for community and local authority-based impacts. This will also require building capacity and resources to enable impact to take place from public health research. Finally, support is required for engagement with local authorities and working with non-health sectors that contribute to health outcomes.

Modelo conceitual aplicável a estudos sobre determinantes sociais da saúde em municípios brasileiros

Resumo Os modelos conceituais de determinantes sociais da saúde (DSS) disponíveis na literatura, embora úteis para compreensão dos mecanismos que afetam os resultados do sistema de saúde sobre as condições de vida das populações, apresentam limitações quanto à sua aplicação em estudos empíricos e, consequentemente, na orientação da gestão de políticas públicas de saúde. Isso ocorre porque as categorias adotadas por esses modelos não são adequadamente representadas por indicadores ou variáveis homogêneas, sujeitas a manipulações matemáticas ou estatísticas em um sistema simples de relacionamentos. Este estudo tem por objetivo contribuir para o preenchimento dessa lacuna, ao propor um modelo conceitual de DSS passível de aplicação operacional, ou seja, de ser reproduzido em modelos matemáticos ou estatísticos, a fim de subsidiar estudos e definir estratégias de saúde pública. O esforço recorre à literatura para revisar modelos conceituais consagrados, identificar um conjunto de DSS e apresentar recomendações e critérios de escolha. Na sequência, identifica fontes de dados confiáveis que disponibilizem indicadores e variáveis dispostos em séries históricas e propõe o desenho de um modelo conceitual aplicável, cuja operacionalização requer métodos e ferramentas próprios de uma abordagem sistêmica.

Understanding and addressing social determinants to advance cancer health equity in the United States: A blueprint for practice, research, and policy

Although cancer mortality rates declined in the United States in recent decades, some populations experienced little benefit from advances in cancer prevention, early detection, treatment, and survivorship care. In fact, some cancer disparities between populations of low and high socioeconomic status widened during this period. Many potentially preventable cancer deaths continue to occur, and disadvantaged populations bear a disproportionate burden. Reducing the burden of cancer and eliminating cancer-related disparities will require more focused and coordinated action across multiple sectors and in partnership with communities. This article, part of the American Cancer Society's Cancer Control Blueprint series, introduces a framework for understanding and addressing social determinants to advance cancer health equity and presents actionable recommendations for practice, research, and policy. The article aims to accelerate progress toward eliminating disparities in cancer and achieving health equity.

Bridging the epidemiology-policy divide: A consequential and evidence-based framework to optimize population health

Epidemiology is the scientific cornerstone of public health. Its traditional role has been to test scientific hypotheses on causal relationships of exposures with health outcomes, the results of which should in turn be synthesized and lead to evidence-based recommendations and the formation of policy. However, the messy truth is that the path from epidemiology to policy is frequently not a perfectly rational, linear one, and the choices of which scientific hypotheses are pursued and the ways in which they are tested, evaluated, and translated into policies do not occur systematically. One avenue for bridging this divide is widespread adoption and implementation of a consequential, evidence-based framework-whereby we can systematically facilitate the translation of epidemiology into policies and interventions to optimize population health. This paper describes the roadmap for a seven-step, outcomes-based consequential approach, that includes priority-setting of problems at both the federal and regional/state levels, and that proposes to strengthen alignment of public and private research funding and journals with these priorities. Over the long term, implementing this framework should help to bridge the divide between epidemiology and policy and optimize the use of increasingly constrained resources to reduce disease burden and promote the nation's health.

Healthcare inequality issues among immigrant elders after neoliberal welfare reform: empirical findings from the United States

Even with the increasing importance being placed on research into immigrant elders' healthcare use as countries change their policies to reflect their increasing immigrant and aging populations, little research has examined changes in healthcare use disparities between immigrant and native elders in relation to these policy changes. To fill this gap in the literature, this study examined healthcare disparities in relation to the welfare reform that the US implemented in 1996 and then compared significant indicators of immigrants' healthcare use during the pre- and post-reform periods. The difference-in-difference (DD) analyses and post hoc probing of the DD analyses were used in multivariate logistic regression of the National Health Information Survey data that were pooled for the pre- and post-reform periods. The results revealed that while inequalities in healthcare existed before the reform, they significantly increased after the reform. A further test showed that the changes in the inequalities were significant among relatively long-stay immigrants, but not significant among immigrants who entered the US before the reform and thus were exempted from the reform restrictions. During the pre-reform period, insurance, employment, sex, and race/ethnicity were related to healthcare use; however, the enabling factors (i.e., insurance, income, and education) and social structural factors (i.e., marital status, family structure, length of US residency, race/ethnicity, and geographical region) explained the post-reform immigrants' healthcare use, while controlling for healthcare needs factors. These findings suggest that welfare reform may be the driving force of inequalities in healthcare.

A review of neighborhood effects and early child development: How, where, and for whom, do neighborhoods matter?

This paper describes a scoping review of 42 studies of neighborhood effects on developmental health for children ages 0-6, published between 2009 and 2014. It focuses on three themes: (1) theoretical mechanisms that drive early childhood development, i.e. how neighborhoods matter for early childhood development; (2) dependence of such mechanisms on place-based characteristics i.e. where neighborhood effects occur; (3) dependence of such mechanisms on child characteristics, i.e. for whom is development most affected. Given that ecological systems theories postulate diverse mechanisms via which neighborhood characteristics affect early child development, we specifically examine evidence on mediation and/or moderation effects. We conclude by discussing future challenges, and proposing recommendations for analyses that utilize ecological longitudinal population-based databases.

Taking stock of the social determinants of health: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

In recent decades, the social determinants of health (SDOH) has gained increasing prominence as a foundational concept for population and public health in academic literature and policy documents, internationally. However, alongside its widespread dissemination, and in light of multiple conceptual models, lists, and frameworks, some dilution and confusion is apparent. This scoping review represents an attempt to take stock of SDOH literature in the context of contemporary population and public health.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to synthesize and map SDOH literature, informed by the methods of Arksey and O'Malley (2005). We searched 5 academic and 3 grey literature databases for "social determinants of health" and "population health" or "public health" or "health promotion," published 2004-2014. We also conducted a search on "inequity" or "inequality" or "disparity" or "social gradient" and "Canad*" to ensure that we captured articles where this language was used to discuss the SDOH. We included articles that discussed SDOH in depth, either explicitly or in implicit but nuanced ways. We hand-searched reference lists to further identify relevant articles.

FINDINGS

Our synthesis of 108 articles showed wide variation by study setting, target audience, and geographic scope, with most articles published in an academic setting, by Canadian authors, for policy-maker audiences. SDOH were communicated by authors as a list, model, or story; each with strengths and weaknesses. Thematic analysis identified one theme: health equity as an overarching and binding concept to the SDOH. Health equity was understood in different ways with implications for action on the SDOH.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the vast SDOH literature, there is a need to identify and clearly articulate the essence and implications of the SDOH concept. We recommend that authors be intentional in their efforts to present and discuss SDOH to ensure that they speak to its foundational concept of health equity.

[DOhaD and epigenetic information: societal challenges]

The concept of the developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD) alters our understanding of what constitutes "health" or "disease" intended as chronic, non-communicable diseases, which develop over the life course in high income and emerging countries. It implies a change in paradigm forming a basis for prevention policies across the globe. It also impacts psychological, social, economic, ethical and legal sciences. In line with the unanticipated underpinning epigenetic mechanisms are also the social issues (including public policies) that could be produced by the knowledge related to DOHaD that opens a wide field of inquiry. The information unveiled by epigenetics coupled with information on lifestyle including during the development phase, is of unforeseen nature, raising issues of different nature. Therefore it requires specific attention and research, and a specific support by a pluridisciplinary reflection since the very beginning of its production, to anticipate the questions that might be raised in the future.

[The new paradigm of the developmental origin of health and diseases (DOHaD)--Epigenetics and environment: evidence and missing links]

According to the new paradigm of the Developpemental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD), the environmental factors to which an individual is exposed throughout his life can leave an epigenetic footprint on the genome. A crucial period is the early development, where the epigenome is particularly sensitive to the effects of the environment, and during which the individual builds up his health capital that will enable him to respond more or less well to the vagaries of life. The research challenge is to decipher the modes of action and the epigenetic mechanisms put into play by environmental factors that lead to increased disease susceptibility or resilience. The challenge for health is to translate these scientific discoveries into action through, among others, the establishment of preventive recommendations to slow down the growing incidence of non communicable diseases.

Advocacy for health equity: a synthesis review

Context

Health inequalities are systematic differences in health among social groups that are caused by unequal exposure to—and distributions of—the social determinants of health (SDH). They are persistent between and within countries despite action to reduce them. Advocacy is a means of promoting policies that improve health equity, but the literature on how to do so effectively is dispersed. The aim of this review is to synthesize the evidence in the academic and gray literature and to provide a body of knowledge for advocates to draw on to inform their efforts.

Methods

This article is a systematic review of the academic literature and a fixed-length systematic search of the gray literature. After applying our inclusion criteria, we analyzed our findings according to our predefined dimensions of advocacy for health equity. Last, we synthesized our findings and made a critical appraisal of the literature.

Findings

The policy world is complex, and scientific evidence is unlikely to be conclusive in making decisions. Timely qualitative, interdisciplinary, and mixed-methods research may be valuable in advocacy efforts. The potential impact of evidence can be increased by “packaging” it as part of knowledge transfer and translation. Increased contact between researchers and policymakers could improve the uptake of research in policy processes. Researchers can play a role in advocacy efforts, although health professionals and disadvantaged people, who have direct contact with or experience of hardship, can be particularly persuasive in advocacy efforts. Different types of advocacy messages can accompany evidence, but messages should be tailored to advocacy target. Several barriers hamper advocacy efforts. The most frequently cited in the academic literature are the current political and economic zeitgeist and related public opinion, which tend to blame disadvantaged people for their ill health, even though biomedical approaches to health and political short-termism also act as barriers. These barriers could be tackled through long-term actions to raise public awareness and understanding of the SDH and through training of health professionals in advocacy. Advocates need to take advantage of “windows of opportunity,” which open and close quickly, and demonstrate expertise and credibility.

Conclusions

This article brings together for the first time evidence from the academic and the gray literature and provides a building block for efforts to advocate for health equity. Evidence regarding many of the dimensions is scant, and additional research is merited, particularly concerning the applicability of findings outside the English-speaking world. Advocacy organizations have a central role in advocating for health equity, given the challenges bridging the worlds of civil society, research, and policy.

New Approaches for Moving Upstream

Growing evidence shows that unequal distribution of wealth and power across race, class, and gender produces the differences in living conditions that are “upstream” drivers of health inequalities. Health educators and other public health professionals, however, still develop interventions that focus mainly on “downstream” behavioral risks. Three factors explain the difficulty in translating this knowledge into practice. First, in their allegiance to the status quo, powerful elites often resist upstream policies and programs that redistribute wealth and power. Second, public health practice is often grounded in dominant biomedical and behavioral paradigms, and health departments also face legal and political limits on expanding their scope of activities. Finally, the evidence for the impact of upstream interventions is limited, in part because methodologies for evaluating upstream interventions are less developed. To illustrate strategies to overcome these obstacles, we profile recent campaigns in the United States to enact living wages, prevent mortgage foreclosures, and reduce exposure to air pollution. We then examine how health educators working in state and local health departments can transform their practice to contribute to campaigns that reallocate the wealth and power that shape the living conditions that determine health and health inequalities. We also consider health educators’ role in producing the evidence that can guide transformative expansion of upstream interventions to reduce health inequalities.

Introduction--Knowledge translation and urban health equity: advancing the agenda

In 2011, an interdisciplinary symposium was organized in Toronto, Canada to investigate prevailing models of health policy change in the knowledge translation literature and to assess the applicability of these models for equity-focused urban health research. The papers resulting from the symposium have been published together, in the Journal of Urban Health, along with this introductory essay. This essay describes how the different papers grapple in different ways with how to understand and to bridge the gaps between urban health research and action. The breadth of perspectives reflected in the papers (e.g., social epidemiology, public health, political science, sociology, critical labor studies, and educational psychology) shed much light on core tensions in the relationship between KT and health equity. The first tension is whether the content of evidence or the context of decision making is the strong determinate of research impact in relation to health equity policy. The second tension is whether relationships between health equity researchers and decision makers are best viewed in terms of collaboration or of conflict. The third concerns the role that power plays in evidence-based policy making, when the issues at stake are not only empirical but also normative.