Rodgers Mark, South Emily, Harden Melissa, Whitehead Margaret, Sowden Amanda
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Arch Public Health. 2025 Jun 13;83(1):153. doi: 10.1186/s13690-025-01644-x.
Evaluations of public health interventions require an understanding of the contextual factors that shape their effectiveness. Context (including socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental factors) plays a critical role in establishing how interventions achieve impact, why outcomes can vary and whether the interventions of interest can be translated from one context to another. This overview explores the extent to which systematic reviews of public health interventions for low-income or low socioeconomic status (SES) populations report contextual factors influencing outcomes.
Systematic reviews were identified through a scoping review and updated searches in March 2023. Reviews focused on interventions targeting smoking, unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, and harmful alcohol use in disadvantaged groups. Reviews were screened for eligibility, and data were extracted on contextual factors related to intervention implementation and effectiveness. Data were synthesised using a framework approach, categorising findings by behaviour and level of intervention.
Applying a very broad definition of context, 29 of 86 identified reviews provided some degree of contextual data which varied across interventions but was largely restricted to intervention implementation and delivery factors. For example, environmental characteristics, such as crime and perceived personal safety, affected the use of physical activity infrastructure in disadvantaged areas. Food voucher schemes had mixed results, with social and economic factors affecting their use and effectiveness. However, most reviews lacked sufficient reporting on contextual data, limiting conclusions on the role of context in intervention outcomes.
Contextual factors are often underreported in systematic reviews of public health interventions targeting disadvantaged populations. Such underreporting is likely to be similar in other areas of public health. This limits policymakers' ability to adapt interventions to specific settings. Improved reporting and consideration of context in systematic reviews are needed to ensure that interventions are appropriately tailored to the needs of low-income and low SES groups.
对公共卫生干预措施的评估需要了解影响其有效性的背景因素。背景(包括社会经济、文化和环境因素)在确定干预措施如何实现影响、结果为何会有所不同以及所关注的干预措施能否从一种背景转移到另一种背景方面起着关键作用。本综述探讨了针对低收入或低社会经济地位(SES)人群的公共卫生干预措施的系统评价在多大程度上报告了影响结果的背景因素。
通过范围综述和2023年3月的更新检索确定系统评价。综述聚焦于针对弱势群体吸烟、不健康饮食、身体活动不足和有害饮酒的干预措施。对综述进行资格筛选,并提取与干预措施实施和有效性相关的背景因素数据。使用框架方法对数据进行综合,按行为和干预水平对结果进行分类。
采用非常宽泛的背景定义,86项已识别的综述中有29项提供了一定程度的背景数据,这些数据因干预措施而异,但主要限于干预措施的实施和交付因素。例如,犯罪和感知到的个人安全等环境特征影响了贫困地区体育活动基础设施的使用。食品券计划的结果不一,社会和经济因素影响了其使用和有效性。然而,大多数综述缺乏对背景数据的充分报告,限制了关于背景在干预结果中作用的结论。
在针对弱势群体的公共卫生干预措施的系统评价中,背景因素往往报告不足。这种报告不足在公共卫生的其他领域可能也类似。这限制了政策制定者根据具体情况调整干预措施的能力。需要改进系统评价中背景的报告和考量,以确保干预措施能根据低收入和低社会经济地位群体的需求进行适当调整。