首页> 外文期刊>Critical Public Health >The limitations of targeting to address inequalities in health: a case study of road traffic injury prevention from the UK
【24h】

The limitations of targeting to address inequalities in health: a case study of road traffic injury prevention from the UK

机译:旨在解决健康不平等问题的局限性:来自英国的道路交通伤害预防案例研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

So-called 'Third Way' responses to inequalities in health have encouraged the 'targeting' of evidence-based interventions at those communities at high risk in order to improve health outcomes. In the UK, one area of persisting inequalities in mortality and morbidity risk is from injury, and there have been recent national and local incentives for relevant agencies to 'address deprivation' in delivering reductions in injury through 'targeting' particular communities in the context of an evidence-based approach to policy making. This case study draws on interviews with those responsible for implementing policy in London in order to explore the tensions inherent in such approaches. We suggest that 'taking deprivation into account' by targeting is unlikely to be a fruitful route for addressing inequalities in health, as it devolves responsibility to a level which has no power to address the determinants of inequality.
机译:对健康不平等的所谓“第三种方式”反应鼓励将基于证据的干预措施“瞄准”到高风险人群中,以改善健康状况。在英国,致死率和发病率风险持续不平等的一个领域是伤害,并且最近有国家和地方的激励措施,要求相关机构通过“针对”特定社区来“解决贫困”问题,以减少伤害。基于证据的决策方法。本案例研究以对伦敦实施政策负责人的访谈为基础,以探讨此类方法固有的紧张关系。我们建议,通过有针对性地“考虑剥夺”,不可能是解决卫生不平等问题的一条富有成效的途径,因为它将责任下放到了无权解决不平等决定因素的水平。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号