Skip to main content

Table 8 Quality assessment

From: Use of programme theory to understand the differential effects of interventions across socio-economic groups in systematic reviews—a systematic methodology review

Author

PRISMA rationale (item 3): Describe assumptions about mechanism(s) by which the intervention is assumed to have an impact on health equity. The review should describe a priori how and why interventions are expected to work and the influence of factors such as setting and participant and programme characteristics

PRISMA rationale (item 3A): Provide the logic model/analytical framework, if done, to show the pathways through which the intervention is assumed to affect health equity and how it was developed

Discussion/conclusions (item 26): Present extent and limits of applicability (what does/does not work) to disadvantaged populations of interest, and describe the evidence and logic (how/why) underlying those judgements

Backholer et al., [28]a

 

Bambra et al., [29]b, d

Bambra et al., [29]c, d

Beauchamp et al., [35]

 

Boelsen-Robinson et al., [34]a

 

Brown et al., [36]d, e

 

Brown et al., [37]a, d

  

Brown et al., [38]a

  

Brown et al., [39]a

  

Bull et al., [40]

 

Ciciriello et al., [58]

 

Cleland et al., [41]

  

Ejemot-Nwadiaro et al., [59]

  

Everson-Hock et al., [42]

 

Gardner et al., [43]

  

Gittelsohn et al., [60]

 

Gurol-Urganci et al., [61]

  

Hartmann-Boyce et al., [62]

 

Hill et al., [44]

  

Hollands et al., [45]a, d

 

Kader et al., [46]

  

Kendrick et al., [47]

  

Kristjansson et al., [48]

Kroon et al., [63]

  

Laba et al., [49]d

 

Laws et al., [50]

 

Lutge et al., [64]

 

Magnee et al., [51]

 

McGill et al., [52]a

 

McLean et al., [20]d

Mizdrak et al., [53]

  

Moore et al., [54]

 

Moredich et al., [55]

  

Pega et al., [65]d

 

Polec et al., [66]

Rojas-Garcia et al., [56]

 

Sarink et al., [57]a

Total

28

8

31

  1. aStudy reports use of PRISMA Equity Extension [1]
  2. bStudy 1 review in child population [32, 34]
  3. cStudy 2 review in adult population [32, 33, 35]
  4. dRefer to conceptual/casual modelling/behavioural frameworks rather than analytical framework/logic models
  5. eTwo studies report on same review [38, 39]