scholarly journals P20 Are political features associated with population health outcomes? a systematic review of internationally comparative studies

Author(s):  
M Barnish ◽  
M Tørnes ◽  
B Horne
BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e020886 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Barnish ◽  
Michelle Tørnes ◽  
Becky Nelson-Horne

ObjectivesTo provide a 7-year update of the most recent systematic review about the relationships between political features and population health outcomes.SettingInternationally comparative scholarly literature.Data sourcesTen scholarly bibliographic databases plus supplementary searches in bibliographies and Google Scholar were used to update a previous systematic review. The final search was conducted in November 2017.Primary and secondary outcome measuresAny population health outcome measure, apart from healthcare spending.Results73 unique publications were identified from the previous systematic review. The database searches to update the literature identified 45 356 raw records with 35 207 remaining following de-duplication. 55 publications were identified from supplementary searches. In total, 258 publications proceeded to full-text review and 176 were included in narrative synthesis. 85 studies were assessed at low risk of bias, 89 at moderate risk of bias and none at high risk of bias. Assessment could not be conducted for two studies that had only book chapters. No meta-analysis was conducted. 102 studies assessed welfare state generosity and 79 found a positive association. Of the 17 studies that assessed political tradition, 15 were found to show a positive association with the left-of-centre tradition. 44 studies assessed democracy and 34 found a positive association. 28 studies assessed globalisation and 14 found a negative association, while seven were positive and seven inconclusive.ConclusionsThis review concludes that welfare state generosity, left-of-centre democratic political tradition and democracy are generally positively associated with population health. Globalisation may be negatively associated with population health, but the results are less conclusive. It is important for the academic public health community to engage with the political evidence base in its research as well as in stakeholder engagement, in order to facilitate positive outcomes for population health.


2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 1167-1176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth S. Barnert ◽  
Ryan J. Coller ◽  
Bergen B. Nelson ◽  
Lindsey R. Thompson ◽  
John Tran ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R Vago ◽  
Resh Gupta ◽  
Sara Lazar

One potential pathway by which mindfulness-based meditation improves health outcomes is through changes in cognitive functioning. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) was conducted with a focus on assessing the state of the evidence for effects on cognitive processes and associated assays. Here, we comment on confounding issues surrounding the reporting of these and related findings, including 1) criteria that appropriately define an MBI; 2) limitations of assays used to measure cognition; and 3) methodological quality of MBI trials and reporting of findings. Because these issues contribute to potentially distorted interpretations of existing data, we offer constructive means for interpretation and recommendations for moving the field of mindfulness research forward regarding the effects on cognition.


2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 788-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudio Ricci ◽  
Riccardo Casadei ◽  
Giovanni Taffurelli ◽  
Carlo Alberto Pacilio ◽  
Marco Ricciardiello ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina Idriss-Wheeler ◽  
Julia Hajjar ◽  
Sanni Yaya

Abstract Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a population health problem linked to a myriad of negative psychological, physical, emotional, sexual and reproductive health outcomes for women. The movement towards working with boys and men over the past couple of decades has increased the number of interventions specifically directed at men who perpetrate violence against a female partner. There is little evidence-based research on key characteristics of effective interventions directed at men to reduce or prevent IPV against female partners. The objective of this systematic review is to identify interventions specifically directed at males , as the perpetrators of violence against women, that have proven to be effective in preventing or reducing intimate partner violence. Methods The following electronic databases will be used to search for peer-reviewed studies: MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), PsycInfo (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (EBSCO), Gender Watch (ProQuest), Web of Science (Web of Knowledge), PROSPERO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Database (Ovid) and SCOPUS. We will include randomized control trials, non-randomized studies of interventions published in peer-reviewed journals and relevant unpublished manuscripts, books/chapters and clinical or programme study reports. Studies have to demonstrate direction of effect (i.e. pre-post intervention/difference between groups) in terms of prevention or reduction in the outlined outcomes. Primary outcomes include change in behaviour and knowledge of male perpetrator regarding the impact of IPV on women as well as women’s experience of IPV. Secondary outcomes include change in behaviours around substance use and social activities, decrease in negative mental health outcomes and interactions with law enforcement. Studies will be screened, appraised and extracted by two reviewers; any conflicts will be resolved through discussion. Narrative synthesis will be used to analyse and present findings. If sufficient and comparable data is available, a meta-analysis will be conducted. Discussion This review will provide synthesized evidence on interventions directed at males to reduce or prevent their perpetration of intimate partner violence against female partners. Implications for practice will include key characteristics of interventions proven to be effective based on evidence synthesis and certainty of findings. Recommendations for further research will also be considered. Systematic review registration This protocol was submitted for registration in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on September 4, 2020.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document