Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 16, 2025
A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Contextual factors in systematic reviews: understanding public health interventions in low socioeconomic status and
Mark Rodgers1, Emily South2, Melissa Harden2
1Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK. mark.rodgers@york.ac.uk.
Background:
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.
Methods:
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.
Results:
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.
Conclusions:
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.
Related Concept Videos
01:30Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
01:26Methods Of Healthcare Delivery System
Managed Care System:
The managed care system is designed to control the cost while maintaining the quality of care. The patient's care from admission to discharge is planned by the primary care provider or the case manager, also known as the gatekeeper. In a managed care system, the number of care providers is...
01:29Nursing Interventions II: Selecting and Classifying the Nursing Interventions
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:21Dimensions of Health and Illness
01:25Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...