Wolfson Research Institute, Durham University, Queens Campus, Stockton on Tees, UK.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2011 May;65(5):399-406. doi: 10.1136/jech.2010.111195. Epub 2010 Nov 4.
To explore similarities and differences in policy content and the political context of the three main English government reports on health inequalities: the Black Report (1980), the Acheson Enquiry (1998), and the Marmot Review (2010).
Thematic policy and context analysis of the Black Report (1980), the Acheson Enquiry (1998), and the Marmot Review (2010) in terms of: (i) underpinning theoretical principles; (ii) policy recommendations; (iii) the political contexts in which each was released; and (iv) their actual or potential influence on research and policy.
There were great similarities and very few differences in terms of both the theoretical principles guiding the recommendations of these reports and the focus of the recommendations themselves. However, there were clear differences in terms of the political contexts of each report, as well as their subsequent impacts on research and policy.
The paper calls into question the progress of health inequalities research, the use of evidence and of the links between research, politics and policy.
探讨三个主要的英国政府关于健康不平等问题的报告(1980 年的《布莱克报告》、1998 年的《艾奇逊报告》和 2010 年的《马默特审查》)在政策内容和政治背景方面的异同。
对《布莱克报告》(1980 年)、《艾奇逊报告》(1998 年)和《马默特审查》(2010 年)从以下方面进行主题政策和背景分析:(i)理论原则基础;(ii)政策建议;(iii)每份报告发布时的政治背景;以及(iv)它们对研究和政策的实际或潜在影响。
就指导这些报告建议的理论原则以及建议本身的重点而言,这些报告在理论原则和建议重点方面有很大的相似之处,几乎没有差异。然而,在每个报告的政治背景以及它们对研究和政策的后续影响方面存在明显的差异。
本文对健康不平等研究的进展、证据的使用以及研究、政治和政策之间的联系提出了质疑。