Socioeconomic inequalities and the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health

an overview of systematic reviews

A.K. Macintyre, C. Torrens, P. Campbell, M. Maxwell, A. Pollock, H. Biggs, A. Woodhouse, J.M. Williams, J. McLean

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: Despite robust evidence on health inequalities in adulthood, less attention has been paid to inequalities in adolescence. The aim of this overview was to examine systematic review (SR) evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions intended to improve health, happiness and wellbeing for adolescents.
Study Design: An overview (review of systematic reviews).
Methods: Eleven electronic databases were systematically searched to identify SRs of population-level interventions for adolescent health. A secondary data analysis of socioeconomic inequality was conducted to identify whether SRs reported on primary studies in terms of disadvantage, by measures of socioeconomic status (SES) and by differential effects.
Results: 35,310 review titles were screened; 566 full texts were retrieved and 140 SRs met the predefined selection criteria. Differential intervention effects were considered in 42/140 (30%) SRs, 18/140 (13%) reported primary studies using an SES measure and 16/140 (11%) explicitly reported differential effects. 15/140 SRs (11%) explicitly focused on socioeconomic inequalities; of these 4/15 reported differential intervention effects in more detail, 7/15 concluded there was insufficient primary evidence to identify the impact of interventions on socioeconomic inequalities and 4/15 planned to examine differential effects by SES, but this was not reported further.  
Conclusions: Our overview identifies that there is limited SR evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health. Strengthening the evidence on whether interventions narrow or widen inequalities for adolescents must be a priority for public health research.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)154-162
Number of pages9
JournalPublic Health
Volume180
Early online date7 Jan 2020
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 7 Jan 2020

Fingerprint

Social Class
Population
Happiness
Health
Patient Selection
Adolescent Health
Public Health
Databases
Research

Keywords

  • adolescents
  • young people
  • health inequalities
  • health equity
  • overview
  • public health interventions

Cite this

Macintyre, A.K. ; Torrens, C. ; Campbell, P. ; Maxwell, M. ; Pollock, A. ; Biggs, H. ; Woodhouse, A. ; Williams, J.M. ; McLean, J. / Socioeconomic inequalities and the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health : an overview of systematic reviews. In: Public Health. 2020 ; Vol. 180. pp. 154-162.
@article{6e7873107e1e4e4ca750991eae7e4af6,
title = "Socioeconomic inequalities and the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health: an overview of systematic reviews",
abstract = "Objectives: Despite robust evidence on health inequalities in adulthood, less attention has been paid to inequalities in adolescence. The aim of this overview was to examine systematic review (SR) evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions intended to improve health, happiness and wellbeing for adolescents.Study Design: An overview (review of systematic reviews).Methods: Eleven electronic databases were systematically searched to identify SRs of population-level interventions for adolescent health. A secondary data analysis of socioeconomic inequality was conducted to identify whether SRs reported on primary studies in terms of disadvantage, by measures of socioeconomic status (SES) and by differential effects.Results: 35,310 review titles were screened; 566 full texts were retrieved and 140 SRs met the predefined selection criteria. Differential intervention effects were considered in 42/140 (30{\%}) SRs, 18/140 (13{\%}) reported primary studies using an SES measure and 16/140 (11{\%}) explicitly reported differential effects. 15/140 SRs (11{\%}) explicitly focused on socioeconomic inequalities; of these 4/15 reported differential intervention effects in more detail, 7/15 concluded there was insufficient primary evidence to identify the impact of interventions on socioeconomic inequalities and 4/15 planned to examine differential effects by SES, but this was not reported further.   Conclusions: Our overview identifies that there is limited SR evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health. Strengthening the evidence on whether interventions narrow or widen inequalities for adolescents must be a priority for public health research.",
keywords = "adolescents, young people, health inequalities, health equity, overview, public health interventions",
author = "A.K. Macintyre and C. Torrens and P. Campbell and M. Maxwell and A. Pollock and H. Biggs and A. Woodhouse and J.M. Williams and J. McLean",
year = "2020",
month = "1",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.puhe.2019.11.008",
language = "English",
volume = "180",
pages = "154--162",
journal = "Public Health",
issn = "0033-3506",

}

Socioeconomic inequalities and the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health : an overview of systematic reviews. / Macintyre, A.K.; Torrens, C.; Campbell, P.; Maxwell, M.; Pollock, A.; Biggs, H.; Woodhouse, A.; Williams, J.M.; McLean, J.

In: Public Health, Vol. 180, 31.03.2020, p. 154-162.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Socioeconomic inequalities and the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health

T2 - an overview of systematic reviews

AU - Macintyre, A.K.

AU - Torrens, C.

AU - Campbell, P.

AU - Maxwell, M.

AU - Pollock, A.

AU - Biggs, H.

AU - Woodhouse, A.

AU - Williams, J.M.

AU - McLean, J.

PY - 2020/1/7

Y1 - 2020/1/7

N2 - Objectives: Despite robust evidence on health inequalities in adulthood, less attention has been paid to inequalities in adolescence. The aim of this overview was to examine systematic review (SR) evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions intended to improve health, happiness and wellbeing for adolescents.Study Design: An overview (review of systematic reviews).Methods: Eleven electronic databases were systematically searched to identify SRs of population-level interventions for adolescent health. A secondary data analysis of socioeconomic inequality was conducted to identify whether SRs reported on primary studies in terms of disadvantage, by measures of socioeconomic status (SES) and by differential effects.Results: 35,310 review titles were screened; 566 full texts were retrieved and 140 SRs met the predefined selection criteria. Differential intervention effects were considered in 42/140 (30%) SRs, 18/140 (13%) reported primary studies using an SES measure and 16/140 (11%) explicitly reported differential effects. 15/140 SRs (11%) explicitly focused on socioeconomic inequalities; of these 4/15 reported differential intervention effects in more detail, 7/15 concluded there was insufficient primary evidence to identify the impact of interventions on socioeconomic inequalities and 4/15 planned to examine differential effects by SES, but this was not reported further.   Conclusions: Our overview identifies that there is limited SR evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health. Strengthening the evidence on whether interventions narrow or widen inequalities for adolescents must be a priority for public health research.

AB - Objectives: Despite robust evidence on health inequalities in adulthood, less attention has been paid to inequalities in adolescence. The aim of this overview was to examine systematic review (SR) evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions intended to improve health, happiness and wellbeing for adolescents.Study Design: An overview (review of systematic reviews).Methods: Eleven electronic databases were systematically searched to identify SRs of population-level interventions for adolescent health. A secondary data analysis of socioeconomic inequality was conducted to identify whether SRs reported on primary studies in terms of disadvantage, by measures of socioeconomic status (SES) and by differential effects.Results: 35,310 review titles were screened; 566 full texts were retrieved and 140 SRs met the predefined selection criteria. Differential intervention effects were considered in 42/140 (30%) SRs, 18/140 (13%) reported primary studies using an SES measure and 16/140 (11%) explicitly reported differential effects. 15/140 SRs (11%) explicitly focused on socioeconomic inequalities; of these 4/15 reported differential intervention effects in more detail, 7/15 concluded there was insufficient primary evidence to identify the impact of interventions on socioeconomic inequalities and 4/15 planned to examine differential effects by SES, but this was not reported further.   Conclusions: Our overview identifies that there is limited SR evidence on the equity impact of population-level interventions for adolescent health. Strengthening the evidence on whether interventions narrow or widen inequalities for adolescents must be a priority for public health research.

KW - adolescents

KW - young people

KW - health inequalities

KW - health equity

KW - overview

KW - public health interventions

UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/public-health

U2 - 10.1016/j.puhe.2019.11.008

DO - 10.1016/j.puhe.2019.11.008

M3 - Article

VL - 180

SP - 154

EP - 162

JO - Public Health

JF - Public Health

SN - 0033-3506

ER -