Suppr超能文献

证据为本的卫生决策支持工具(STP)10:在系统评价结果评估中考虑公平性。

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 10: Taking equity into consideration when assessing the findings of a systematic review.

机构信息

Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, P.O. Box 7004, St. Olavs plass, N-0130 Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Health Res Policy Syst. 2009 Dec 16;7 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S10. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-7-S1-S10.

Abstract

This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. In this article we address considerations of equity. Inequities can be defined as "differences in health which are not only unnecessary and avoidable but, in addition, are considered unfair and unjust". These have been well documented in relation to social and economic factors. Policies or programmes that are effective can improve the overall health of a population. However, the impact of such policies and programmes on inequities may vary: they may have no impact on inequities, they may reduce inequities, or they may exacerbate them, regardless of their overall effects on population health. We suggest four questions that can be considered when using research evidence to inform considerations of the potential impact a policy or programme option is likely to have on disadvantaged groups, and on equity in a specific setting. These are: 1. Which groups or settings are likely to be disadvantaged in relation to the option being considered? 2. Are there plausible reasons for anticipating differences in the relative effectiveness of the option for disadvantaged groups or settings? 3. Are there likely to be different baseline conditions across groups or settings such that that the absolute effectiveness of the option would be different, and the problem more or less important, for disadvantaged groups or settings? 4. Are there important considerations that should be made when implementing the option in order to ensure that inequities are reduced, if possible, and that they are not increased?

摘要

这篇文章是为负责制定卫生政策和规划的人员以及为这些决策者提供支持的人员撰写的一系列文章之一。在本文中,我们将讨论公平性的考虑因素。不公平现象可定义为“不仅不必要且可避免,但除此之外,还被认为是不公平和不公正的健康差异”。这些在社会和经济因素方面已有充分的记录。有效的政策或方案可以改善人口的整体健康状况。但是,这些政策和方案对不公平现象的影响可能有所不同:它们可能对不公平现象没有影响,可能减少不公平现象,也可能加剧不公平现象,而不论其对人口健康的总体影响如何。我们建议在使用研究证据来告知政策或方案选择对特定环境中弱势群体和公平性的潜在影响时,可以考虑以下四个问题。这些问题是:1. 在考虑中的选项方面,哪些群体或环境可能处于不利地位?2. 有合理的理由预期该选项对弱势群体或环境的相对有效性存在差异吗?3. 不同群体或环境之间是否可能存在不同的基线条件,从而使该选项的绝对有效性有所不同,并且对于弱势群体或环境而言,问题更为重要或更为不重要?4. 在实施该选项时,是否有需要考虑的重要因素,以确保尽可能减少不公平现象,并防止其加剧?

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6980/3271821/31ce1fa59963/1478-4505-7-S1-S10-1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验