Evidence Synthesis to Inform NCD Prevention and Health Promotion
Making informed choices about the use of resources and the likely success of proposed NCD prevention and health promotion initiatives requires knowledge of what strategies have been previously evaluated. This information can be openly and curiously sought through the process of a systematic appraisal of the research evidence. This chapter provides a brief overview of the evidence synthesis process for those who are likely to draw upon evidence reviews to inform their practice. Subcomponents discussed include planning an evidence review, formulating answerable questions about health issues and inequalities, searching for relevant research, including evidence from nonhealth sectors, and appraising its strength and trustworthiness. An understanding of these processes, forming the basic steps of systematic review methodology, and the links between the steps provides a framework for those who need to engage with the evidence as part of an evidence-informed decision-making process.
KeywordsObesity Europe Income Lamar
- Armstrong, R., Waters, E, Jackson, N, Oliver, S, Popay, J, Shepherd, et al. (2007). Guidelines for systematic reviews of health promotion and public health interventions. http://ph.cochrane.org/sites/ph.cochrane.org/files/uploads/Guidelines%20HP_PH%20reviews.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2012.
- Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). 2039.0—Information paper: An introduction to socio-economic indexes for areas (SEIFA). B. Pink. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. Commonwealth of Australia. http://www.abs.gov.au.
- Core Public Health Journal Project. (2004). Core public health journal project (Ver 0.9). Retrieved March 18, 2005, from www.med.yale.edu/eph/library/phjournals.
- Giles-Corti, B., Ryan, K., & Foster, S. (2012). Increasing density in Australia: Maximising the health benefits and minimising harm. Melbourne, Report to The National Heart Foundation of Australia. www.heartfoundation.org.au.
- Grayson, L., & Gomersall, A. (2003). A difficult business: Finding the evidence for social science reviews. London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, Queen Mary University of London. Working paper 19.Google Scholar
- Heath, G. W., Brownson, R. C., Kruger, J., Miles, R., Powell, K. E., Ramsey, L. T., & the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. (2006). The effectiveness of urban design and land use and transport policies and practices to increase physical activity: A aystematic review. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3(Suppl 1), S55–S76.Google Scholar
- Higgins, J. & Green, S., (Eds.). (2006). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. In The cochrane library. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
- Husk, K., Lovell, R., Cooper, C., & Garside, R. (2013). Participation in environmental enhancement/conservation activities for health and well-being in adults (Protocol). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2.Google Scholar
- Jackson, N., & Baker, P. (2005). Evidence based practice in public health: Workbook, Central Area Population Health Services, and Cochrane Public Health Group. http://ph.cochrane.org/workshops-and-events.
- Jackson, N., Gupta, S., Howes, F., Armstrong, R., Brunton, G., Rees, R., et al. (2005). Handsearching for health promotion and public health trials and systematic reviews. XIII Cochrane Colloquium, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
- Kavanagh, J., & Oliver, S. (2008). Reflections on developing and using PROGRESS-Plus. Equity update: Cochrane Health Equity Field and Campbell Equity Methods Group. Ottawa, ON, Cochrane Health Equity Field 2.Google Scholar
- Lamar Soutter Library. (2004). The Lamar Soutter Library. Retrieved March 2005, from http://library.umassed.edu/ebpph.
- Lorenc, T., Petticrew, M., Welch, V., & Tugwell, P. (2013). What types of interventions generate inequalities? Evidence from systematic reviews. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 67(2), 190–193.Google Scholar
- Nebot, M. (2006). Health promotion evaluation and the principle of prevention. Epidemiology and Community Health, 60(1), 5–6.Google Scholar
- Peersman, G., & Oakley, A. (2001). Learning from research. In S. Oliver & G. Peersman (Eds.), Using research for effective health promotion. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., et al. (2011). Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(2), 65–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Roberts, H., Petticrew, M., Liabo, K., & Macintyre, S. (2012). ‘The Anglo-Saxon disease’: A pilot study of the barriers to and facilitators of the use of randomised controlled trials of social programmes in an international context. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66(11), 1025–1029.Google Scholar
- Waters, E., Armstrong, R., Doyle, J., Pettman, T., Hall, B., Priest, N. et al. (2011a). 7: Evidence in public health. In H. Keleher & C. MacDougall (Eds.), Understanding health promotion. South Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Waters, E., Hall, B. J., Armstrong, R., Doyle, J., Pettman, T. L., & de Silva-Sanigorski, A. (2011b). Essential components of public health evidence reviews: Capturing intervention complexity, implementation, economics and equity. Journal of Public Health, 33(3), 462–465.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Watt, A., Cameron, A., Sturm, L., Lathlean, T., Babidge, W., Blamey, S., et al. (2008). Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: An inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 24, 133–139.PubMedGoogle Scholar