RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 What types of interventions generate inequalities? Evidence from systematic reviews
JF Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
JO J Epidemiol Community Health
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd
SP 190
OP 193
DO 10.1136/jech-2012-201257
VO 67
IS 2
A1 Theo Lorenc
A1 Mark Petticrew
A1 Vivian Welch
A1 Peter Tugwell
YR 2013
UL http://jech.bmj.com/content/67/2/190.abstract
AB Background Some effective public health interventions may increase inequalities by disproportionately benefiting less disadvantaged groups (‘intervention-generated inequalities’ or IGIs). There is a need to understand which types of interventions are likely to produce IGIs, and which can reduce inequalities. Methods We conducted a rapid overview of systematic reviews to identify evidence on IGIs by socioeconomic status. We included any review of non-healthcare interventions in high-income countries presenting data on differential intervention effects on any health status or health behaviour outcome. Results were synthesised narratively. Results The following intervention types show some evidence of increasing inequalities (IGIs) between socioeconomic status groups: media campaigns; and workplace smoking bans. However, for many intervention types, data on potential IGIs are lacking. By contrast, the following show some evidence of reducing health inequalities: structural workplace interventions; provision of resources; and fiscal interventions, such as tobacco pricing. Conclusion Our findings are consistent with the idea that ‘downstream’ preventive interventions are more likely to increase health inequalities than ‘upstream’ interventions. More consistent reporting of differential intervention effectiveness is required to help build the evidence base on IGIs.