[减少健康不平等:制定从数据到政治干预的逐步程序]。

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Gesundheitswesen Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-23 DOI:10.1055/a-2217-7761
Andreas Mielck, Verina Wild
{"title":"[减少健康不平等:制定从数据到政治干预的逐步程序]。","authors":"Andreas Mielck, Verina Wild","doi":"10.1055/a-2217-7761","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Low socioeconomic status (assessed by indicators such as educational level or income) is often associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This has been shown in many empirical studies, also in Germany. There are numerous calls for political interventions aimed at reducing these health inequalities, in scientific discussions as well as in the public. Asked for scientifically based recommendations on how to proceed 'from data to action̓, we have to admit that we are still faced with many questions and few answers. Developing these recommendations poses many challenges such as, for example, how to integrate the expertise from different public health disciplines. The present study focuses on the cooperation between social epidemiology, public health ethics and health economics, as we believe that these three disciplines are of particular importance here. We briefly outline what each of them could contribute to the development of practical interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities. We particularly emphasize the importance of public health ethics, as it focuses on questions that to date have largely been neglected in the German discussion: How can we evaluate the empirical data and the proposed political interventions from an ethical point of view? Which health inequalities are 'unjust̓, and how can this normative judgement be justified? Based on the expertise from the three disciplines mentioned above, the aim is to pave the way 'from data to action̓ by developing a well-structured stepwise procedure for interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities. The joint scheme could be very beneficial not only for developing practical interventions, but also for further developing each discipline in itself. The simple scheme proposed here could be a starting point that helps specify many open questions on this path 'from data to action̓.</p>","PeriodicalId":47653,"journal":{"name":"Gesundheitswesen","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Reducing Health Inequalities: Development of a Stepwise Procedure from Data to Political Interventions].\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Mielck, Verina Wild\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2217-7761\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Low socioeconomic status (assessed by indicators such as educational level or income) is often associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This has been shown in many empirical studies, also in Germany. There are numerous calls for political interventions aimed at reducing these health inequalities, in scientific discussions as well as in the public. Asked for scientifically based recommendations on how to proceed 'from data to action̓, we have to admit that we are still faced with many questions and few answers. Developing these recommendations poses many challenges such as, for example, how to integrate the expertise from different public health disciplines. The present study focuses on the cooperation between social epidemiology, public health ethics and health economics, as we believe that these three disciplines are of particular importance here. We briefly outline what each of them could contribute to the development of practical interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities. We particularly emphasize the importance of public health ethics, as it focuses on questions that to date have largely been neglected in the German discussion: How can we evaluate the empirical data and the proposed political interventions from an ethical point of view? Which health inequalities are 'unjust̓, and how can this normative judgement be justified? Based on the expertise from the three disciplines mentioned above, the aim is to pave the way 'from data to action̓ by developing a well-structured stepwise procedure for interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities. The joint scheme could be very beneficial not only for developing practical interventions, but also for further developing each discipline in itself. The simple scheme proposed here could be a starting point that helps specify many open questions on this path 'from data to action̓.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gesundheitswesen\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gesundheitswesen\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2217-7761\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2217-7761","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

社会经济地位低下(以教育水平或收入等指标来评估)往往与发病率和死亡率上升有关。许多实证研究都表明了这一点,德国也是如此。无论是在科学讨论中还是在公众中,都有许多人呼吁采取政治干预措施,以减少这些健康不平等现象。当被要求就如何 "从数据到行动̓"提出有科学依据的建议时,我们不得不承认,我们仍然面临着许多问题,而答案却寥寥无几。制定这些建议面临许多挑战,例如,如何整合不同公共卫生学科的专业知识。本研究的重点是社会流行病学、公共卫生伦理学和卫生经济学之间的合作,因为我们认为这三个学科在这方面尤为重要。我们简要概述了它们各自可为制定旨在减少健康不平等的实际干预措施做出的贡献。我们特别强调公共卫生伦理学的重要性,因为它关注的是迄今为止在德国的讨论中基本上被忽视的问题:如何从伦理角度评估经验数据和拟议的政治干预措施?哪些健康不平等现象是 "不公正的̓"?基于上述三个学科的专业知识,我们的目标是为旨在减少健康不平等的干预措施制定一个结构合理的循序渐进的程序,从而为 "从数据到行动̓"铺平道路。联合计划不仅有利于制定切实可行的干预措施,也有利于进一步发展各学科本身。这里提出的简单方案可以作为一个起点,帮助明确 "从数据到行动̓"这条道路上的许多未决问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Reducing Health Inequalities: Development of a Stepwise Procedure from Data to Political Interventions].

Low socioeconomic status (assessed by indicators such as educational level or income) is often associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This has been shown in many empirical studies, also in Germany. There are numerous calls for political interventions aimed at reducing these health inequalities, in scientific discussions as well as in the public. Asked for scientifically based recommendations on how to proceed 'from data to action̓, we have to admit that we are still faced with many questions and few answers. Developing these recommendations poses many challenges such as, for example, how to integrate the expertise from different public health disciplines. The present study focuses on the cooperation between social epidemiology, public health ethics and health economics, as we believe that these three disciplines are of particular importance here. We briefly outline what each of them could contribute to the development of practical interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities. We particularly emphasize the importance of public health ethics, as it focuses on questions that to date have largely been neglected in the German discussion: How can we evaluate the empirical data and the proposed political interventions from an ethical point of view? Which health inequalities are 'unjust̓, and how can this normative judgement be justified? Based on the expertise from the three disciplines mentioned above, the aim is to pave the way 'from data to action̓ by developing a well-structured stepwise procedure for interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities. The joint scheme could be very beneficial not only for developing practical interventions, but also for further developing each discipline in itself. The simple scheme proposed here could be a starting point that helps specify many open questions on this path 'from data to action̓.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gesundheitswesen
Gesundheitswesen PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
308
期刊介绍: The health service informs you comprehensively and up-to-date about the most important topics of the health care system. In addition to guidelines, overviews and comments, you will find current research results and contributions to CME-certified continuing education and training. The journal offers a scientific discussion forum and a platform for communications from professional societies. The content quality is ensured by a publisher body, the expert advisory board and other experts in the peer review process.
期刊最新文献
[Professional Health Literacy of General Practitioners - Results of the HLS-PROF]. [Rehabilitation Recommendations According to § 31 SGB XI: Empiricism, Discussion and Health Policy Implications]. [The Effect of Service Concentration on Outcome Quality in Obstetrics Departments - An Empirical Analysis of Newborn Mortality in German Hospitals]. [Development Of Long-Term Care Dependency And Utilisation Of Long-Term Care Services From 2017 To 2022 In Germany, Saxony-Anhalt: Analysis Of Health Insurance Data]. [Subjective Health Impairment And Associated Factors In The Heatwave Of Summer 2022: An Online Survey].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1