| Title |
The macro-economic determinants of health and health inequalities—umbrella review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-017-0616-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yannish Naik, Peter Baker, Ian Walker, Taavi Tillmann, Kristin Bash, Darryl Quantz, Frances Hillier-Brown, Clare Bambra |
| Abstract |
The economic determinants of health have been widely recognised as crucial factors affecting health; however, to date, no comprehensive review has been undertaken to summarise these factors and the ways in which they can influence health. We conceptualise the economy as a complex system made up of underlying approaches, regulation from institutions, markets, finance, labour, the public-private balance as well as production and distributional effects, which collectively impact on health through the effect of moderators. This protocol details the methods for an umbrella review to explore the macro-economic factors, strategies, policies and interventions that affect health outcomes and health inequalities. We will identify relevant systematic reviews using search terms derived from the Journal of Economic Literature classification. Reviews will be included if they meet the Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effects criteria for systematic reviews. Reviews of studies with and without controls will be included; both association and intervention studies will be included. Primary outcomes will include but are not limited to morbidity, mortality, prevalence and incidence of conditions and life expectancy. Secondary outcomes will include health inequalities by gender, ethnicity or socio-economic status. Six databases will be searched using tailored versions of our piloted search strategy to locate relevant reviews. Data will be extracted using a standardized pro forma, and the findings will be synthesized into a conceptual framework to address our review aim. Our umbrella review protocol provides a robust method to systematically appraise the evidence in this field, using new conceptual models derived specifically to address the study question. This will yield important information for policymakers, practitioners and researchers at the local, national and international level. It will also help set the future research agenda in this field and guide the development of interventions. This umbrella review protocol has been registered with PROSPERO CRD42017068357 . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 11 | 42% |
| United States | 2 | 8% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Nepal | 1 | 4% |
| Chile | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 54% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 31% |
| Scientists | 4 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 123 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 45 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 7 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 49 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,446,077
of 25,571,620 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#209
of 2,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,259
of 341,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#8
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,571,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.