Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Feb 24;6(2):e1133.
doi: 10.1002/hsr2.1133. eCollection 2023 Feb.

Assessment of health equity consideration in Cochrane systematic reviews and primary studies on urolithiasis

Reyhane Basirat  1 , Sevim Soleimani  2 , Behnam Shakiba  3   4 , Robab Maghsoudi  3
Affiliations

Assessment of health equity consideration in Cochrane systematic reviews and primary studies on urolithiasis

Reyhane Basirat et al. Health Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Background and aims: Health injustice is defined as "unnecessary, preventable, unjustified and unfair health differences." One of the most important scientific sources on the prevention and management of urolithiasis are Cochrane reviews in this field. Given that the first step in eliminating health injustice is to identify the causes, the aim of the present study was to evaluate equity considerations in Cochrane reviews and the included primary studies on urinary stones.

Methods: Cochrane reviews on kidney stones and ureteral stones were searched through the Cochrane Library. The included clinical trials in each of the reviews published after 2000 were also collected. Two different researchers reviewed all the included Cochrane reviews and primary studies. The researchers reviewed each PROGRESS criteria independently (P: place of residence, R: race/ethnicity/culture, O: occupation, G: gender, R: religion, E: education, S: socioeconomic status, S: social capital and networks). The geographical location of the included studies was categorized as low-income, middle-income and high-income countries, based on the World Bank income criteria. Each PROGRESS dimension was reported for both the Cochrane reviews and the primary studies.

Results: In total, 12 Cochrane reviews and 140 primary studies were included in this study. None of the included Cochrane reviews had specifically mentioned the PROGRESS framework in the Method section whereas gender distribution and place of residence were reported in two and one reviews, respectively. In 134 primary studies at least one item of PROGRESS was reported. The most frequent item was gender distribution, followed by place of residence.

Conclusion: According to the results of this study, the authors of Cochrane systematic reviews on urolithiasis, and researchers who have conducted such trials, have rarely considered health equity dimensions when designing and performing their studies. Therefore, researchers worldwide should be motivated to study populations from low-income countries with low socioeconomic status in addition to different cultures, ethnicities, and so forth. Furthermore, RCT reporting guidelines such as CONSORT should include health equity dimensions and the editors and reviewers of scientific journals should encourage researchers to further emphasize on health equity in their studies.

Keywords: health equity; systematic reviews; urolithiasis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

“Behnam Shakiba” is an Editorial Board member of Health Science Reports and a co‐author of this article. To minimize bias, they were excluded from all editorial decision‐makings related to the acceptance of this article for publication. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the literature selection process.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. O'Neill J, Tabish H, Welch V, et al. Applying an equity lens to interventions: using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(1):56‐64. - PubMed
    1. Tugwell P, Maxwell L, Welch V, et al. Is health equity considered in systematic reviews of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group? Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(11):1603‐1610. - PubMed
    1. Petkovic J, Jull J, Yoganathan M, et al. Reporting of health equity considerations in cluster and individually randomized trials. Trials. 2020;21(1):308. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ostlin P, Braveman P, Dachs N, WHO Task Force on Research Priorities for Equity in Health, WHO Equity Team . Priorities for research to take forward the health equity policy agenda. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83(12):948‐953. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Evans T, Brown H. Road traffic crashes: operationalizing equity in the context of health sector reform. Inj Control Saf Promot. 2003;10(2):11‐12. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources