| Warning:  Undefined variable $zfal in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\mlpefetch.php on line 525
 
 Deprecated:  str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\mlpefetch.php on line 525
 
  
 Warning:  Undefined variable $sterm in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\mlpefetch.php on line 530
 
  free 
 Warning:  Undefined variable $sterm in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\mlpefetch.php on line 531
 
  free 
  free 
   English Wikipedia
 
 Nephropedia Template TP (
 
 Twit Text
 
 
 DeepDyve
 Pubget Overpricing
 | lüll   
 
 SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 10: Taking equity  into consideration when assessing the findings of a systematic review Oxman AD; Lavis JN; Lewin S; Fretheim AHealth Res Policy Syst  2009[Dec]; 7 Suppl 1 (Suppl 1): S10This 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?ä
 |