ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2025
Strategic partnership for Health in All Policies and sustainable transport in Scotland: a case study evaluation.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health in All Policies aims to ensure policy decisions across sectors improve health and health equity. Principles of a Health in All Policies approach have been defined as Governance, Comprehensive approach to health, Collaboration, Equity, Participation, Evidence-based and Sustainability. Intersectoral partnerships are a recognised mechanism for Health in All Policies but few evaluations study partnerships that aim to influence policy. This case study evaluation studied a national Partnership focused on transport policy in Scotland. The evaluation aimed to assess the extent to which the Partnership meets the principles of Health in All Policies and informs policy and practice. It also identified actions to improve its impact. Study design: Anonymous self-completion survey of members of the Partnership and its wider Learning Network. Methods: The survey used Likert scales to assess respondents' views on whether the Partnership was meeting its aims and supporting principles of Health in All Policies. Respondents also recorded whether the Partnership had increased their knowledge, supported wider collaboration or informed decision making. The Partnership used structured discussion in groups and an online poll to generate and prioritise improvement actions. Results: A vast majority of respondents scored the Partnership highly for Comprehensive approach to health (82 %), and being Evidence-based (78 %). Most rated it highly for Governance (63 %), Collaboration (62.5 %) Equity (63 %) and Sustainability (57 %). However, less than half (43 %) scored it highly for Participation. Respondents indicated a range of ways the Partnership impacted on their knowledge and practice. The top actions identified by the Partnership to improve its impact were to investigate car culture and identify specific national transport policies to influence. Conclusions: A national sector-specific Partnership can provide a constructive platform for a Health in All Policies approach to improve health and health equity, but further mechanisms are needed to support participation of affected populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.