Causes, Solutions and Health Inequalities: Comparing Perspectives of Professional Stakeholders and Community Participants Experiencing Low Income and Poor Health in London
Neil McHugh, Rachel Baker, Cam Donaldson, Ahalya Bala, Marta Mojarrieta, Gregory White, Olga Biosca
{"title":"Causes, Solutions and Health Inequalities: Comparing Perspectives of Professional Stakeholders and Community Participants Experiencing Low Income and Poor Health in London","authors":"Neil McHugh, Rachel Baker, Cam Donaldson, Ahalya Bala, Marta Mojarrieta, Gregory White, Olga Biosca","doi":"10.1111/hex.70128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Engaging with the public can influence policy decisions, particularly towards more radical policy change. While established research exists exploring public perceptions on causes of health inequalities, much less exists on how to tackle health inequalities in the UK. Despite an emphasis on ‘lived experience’, currently no study has focused on how individuals with very poor health conceive of both causes of, and solutions to, health inequalities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Q methodology was used to identify and describe the shared perspectives that exist on causes of, and solutions to, health inequalities experienced in low-income communities. Community participants living with low-incomes and poor health (<i>n</i> = 20) and professional stakeholders (<i>n</i> = 20) from London rank ordered 34 ‘Causes’ and 39 ‘Solutions’ statements onto quasi-normal shaped grids according to their point of view. Factor analysis defined factors for both ‘Causes’ and ‘Solutions’.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Analysis produced three-factor solutions for both the ‘Causes’ and ‘Solutions’. ‘Causes’ are (i) ‘Systemic inequality and poverty’, (ii) ‘Ignored and marginalised communities’, (iii) ‘Precariousness, chronic stress and hopelessness’. ‘Solutions’ are (i) ‘Meeting basic needs and providing opportunities to thrive’, (ii) ‘Empowering individuals to take control’, (iii) ‘Supporting healthy choices’. No professional stakeholders aligned with ‘Ignored and marginalised communities’ while at least one community participant or professional stakeholder aligned with all other factors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Results support the view that the public has a relatively sophisticated understanding of causes of health inequalities and help challenge assumptions held by policy actors that lay members of the public do not recognise and understand more upstream ways to respond to health inequalities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>The public contributed to the design of the Q study. Surveys and interviews with community participants informed the development of the statement set and the statement set was also piloted with community participants and finalised based on feedback.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"27 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70128","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70128","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Engaging with the public can influence policy decisions, particularly towards more radical policy change. While established research exists exploring public perceptions on causes of health inequalities, much less exists on how to tackle health inequalities in the UK. Despite an emphasis on ‘lived experience’, currently no study has focused on how individuals with very poor health conceive of both causes of, and solutions to, health inequalities.
Methods
Q methodology was used to identify and describe the shared perspectives that exist on causes of, and solutions to, health inequalities experienced in low-income communities. Community participants living with low-incomes and poor health (n = 20) and professional stakeholders (n = 20) from London rank ordered 34 ‘Causes’ and 39 ‘Solutions’ statements onto quasi-normal shaped grids according to their point of view. Factor analysis defined factors for both ‘Causes’ and ‘Solutions’.
Results
Analysis produced three-factor solutions for both the ‘Causes’ and ‘Solutions’. ‘Causes’ are (i) ‘Systemic inequality and poverty’, (ii) ‘Ignored and marginalised communities’, (iii) ‘Precariousness, chronic stress and hopelessness’. ‘Solutions’ are (i) ‘Meeting basic needs and providing opportunities to thrive’, (ii) ‘Empowering individuals to take control’, (iii) ‘Supporting healthy choices’. No professional stakeholders aligned with ‘Ignored and marginalised communities’ while at least one community participant or professional stakeholder aligned with all other factors.
Conclusion
Results support the view that the public has a relatively sophisticated understanding of causes of health inequalities and help challenge assumptions held by policy actors that lay members of the public do not recognise and understand more upstream ways to respond to health inequalities.
Patient or Public Contribution
The public contributed to the design of the Q study. Surveys and interviews with community participants informed the development of the statement set and the statement set was also piloted with community participants and finalised based on feedback.
期刊介绍:
Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including:
• Person-centred care and quality improvement
• Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management
• Public perceptions of health services
• Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting
• Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation
• Empowerment and consumerism
• Patients'' role in safety and quality
• Patient and public role in health services research
• Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy
Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.