Using risk analysis in Health Impact Assessment: The impact of different relative risks for men and women in different socio-economic groups

Health Policy

Volumn 67, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 215-224

  Nilunger, Louise ^a,e   Diderichsen, Finn ^b   Burström, Bo ^c   Östlin, Piroska ^a,d  

^a KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^c Division Social Medicine   (Sweden)

^d SWEDISH INSTITUTE FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASE CONTROL   (Sweden)

^e WHO Euro   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Attributable and impact fraction; Disability adjusted life years (DALY); Health Impact Assessment; Inequality; Relative risks; Risk analysis

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE LUNG DISEASE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; LUNG CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREVALENCE; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SEX DIFFERENCE; SMOKING; SOCIOECONOMICS; STROKE;

EID: 0347946751     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-8510(03)00122-2     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Scott-Samuel A. Health Impact Assessment - theory into practice. Journal Epidemiology and Community Health. 52:1998;704-705.
2. Health Impact Assessment. Main concepts and suggested approach. Gothenburg: European Centre for Health Policy, WHO Regional Office for Europe; December 1999.
3. European Union Article 152. The Amsterdam Treaty. Brussels: European Commission; 1997.
4. European Commission. Press release of the 2219th Health Council Meeting 12923/99 (press 351). Brussels: European Commission; 1999.
5. European Commission. Communication in the health strategy of the European community. COM (2000) 285 final 2000/0119 (COD). Brussels: European Commission; 2000.
6. European Parliament. Needle report on the Commission's communication on the future of public health in the European Community. Brussels: European Commission; 1999.
7. European Commission. Amended proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the council adopting a programme of community action in the field of public health (2001-2006). COM (2001) 302 final 2000/0119 (COD) Brussels: European Commission; 2001.
8. World Health Organisation. Health 21: health for all in the 21st century. Copenhagen: World Health Organisation; 1999.
9. Whitehead M, Dahlgren G, Gilson L. Developing the policy response to inequalities in health: a global perspective. In: Evans T, Whitehead M, Diderichsen F, Bhuiya, Wirth M, editors. Challenging inequities in health. From Ethics to action. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.
10. Lehto J, Ritsatakis A. Health Impact Assessment as a tool for intersectional health policy. In: Health Impact Assessment: from theory to practice. Report on the Loe Kaprio Workshop, Gothenburg, 28-30 October 1999.
11. The National Institute of Public Health in Sweden. Models and methods of developing Health Impact Assessment. Report no. 2001:9. Sweden: The National Institute of Public Health; 2001 [in Swedish].
12. National Research and Development Centre for Well-being and Health in Finland (Stakes). Human impact assessment. Ideacard 4/00. Finland: National Research and Development Centre for Well-being and Health; 2001.
13. The Institute of Public Health in Ireland. Health Impact Assessment. A baseline report for Ireland and Northern Ireland. Ireland: The Institute of Public Health; 2001.
14. Breeze C, Hall R. Health Impact Assessment in government policymaking: developments in Wales. Policy learning curve series no. 6. Brussels: European Centre for Health Policy, WHO; 2001.
15. Put GV, den Broeder L, Penris M, Roscam-Abbing EW. The Dutch experience with HIA at a national policy level. Policy learning curve series no. 4. Brussels: European Centre for Health Policy, WHO; 2001.
16. Hunter DJ, Fulop N, Warner M. From health of the nation to our healthier nation. A case study. Policy learning curve series no. 2. Brussels: European Centre for Health Policy, WHO; 2000.
17. Health on equal terms - national goals for public health. Governmental Bill no. 2002/03:35. Stockholm; 2003.
18. Östlin P, Diderichsen F. Equity oriented national strategy for public health in Sweden. A case study. Policy learning curve series no. 1. Brussels: European Centre for Health Policy, WHO; 2001.
19. Diderichsen F. Health and social inequities in Sweden. Societe des Sciences Medicales. 31(3):1990;359-367.
20. Blank N., Diderichsen F. Social inequalities in the experience of illness in Sweden a "double suffering" Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine. 24(2):1996;81-89.
21. Whitehead M.M. Where do we stand? Research and policy issues concerning inequalities in health and in healthcare. Acta Oncologica. 38(1):1999;41-50.
22. Dahlgren G., Diderichsen F. Strategies for equity in health: report from Sweden. International Journal of Health Services: Planning, Administration, Evaluation. 16(4):1986;517-537.
23. Acheson D, editor. Independent inquiry into inequalities in health. London: The Stationery Office; 1998.
24. Leon D., Walt G., Gilson L. International perspectives on health inequalities and policy. British Medical Journal. 322:2002;591-594.
25. Mackenbach J, Bakker M. Reducing inequalities in health: a European perspective. London: Routledge; 2002.
26. Scott-Samuel A, Birley M, Arden K. The Merseyside guidelines for Health Impact Assessment. Liverpool: Merseyside Health Impact Assessment Steering Group; 1998.
27. Canadian Public Health Association. Health impacts of social and economic conditions: implications for public policy. Ottowa: CPHA; 1997.
28. Lock K. Health Impact Assessment. British Medical Journal. 320:2000;1395-1398.
29. Banken R. Strategies for institutionalising Health Impact Assessment. Discussion paper series no. 1. Brussels: European Centre for Health Policy, WHO; 2001.
30. Mindell J., Hansell A., Morrison D., Douglas M., Joffe M. What do we need for robust, quantitative Health Impact Assessment? Journal of Public Health Medicine. 23(3):2001;173-178.
31. Douglas M., Conway L., Gorman D., Gavin S., Hanlon P. Developing principles for Health Impact Assessment. Journal of Public Health Medicine. 23(2):2001;148-154.
32. Parry J., Stevens A. Prospective Health Impact Assessment: pitfalls, problems and possible ways forward. British Medical Journal. 323:2001;1177-1182.
33. Douglas M., Scott-Samuel A. Addressing health inequalities in Health Impact Assessment. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 55:2001;450-451.
34. Evaluation and use of epidemiological evidence for environmental health risk assessment. WHO guideline document. World Health Organisation, Regional office for Europe, Copenhagen, 2000.
35. Joffe M., Mindell J. A framework for the evidence base to support Health Impact Assessment. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 56:2002;132-138.
36. Gunning-Schepers LJ, Barendregt JJM, van der Maas PJ. PREVENT, a model to estimate health benefits of prevention. In: World Health Organisation (WHO). Tools for health futures research. Geneva: World Health Organisation;1993.
37. Nurminen M., Karjalainen A. Epidemiologic estimate of the proportion of fatalities related to occupational factors in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health. 27(3):2001;161-213.
38. Murrey CJL, Lopez AD. The global burden of disease. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1996.
39. Murray C.J.L., Lopez A.D. On the comparable quantification of health risks, lessons from the global burden of disease study. Epidemiology. 10:1999;594-605.
40. Hein H.O., Suadicani P., Gyntelberg F. Lung cancer risk and social class. Danish Medical Bulletin. 39:1992;173-176.
41. Marmot M.G., Shipley M.J., Rose G. Inequalities in death - specific explanations of a general pattern? Lancet. 1:1984;1003-1006.
42. Hein H.O., Suadicani P., Gyntelberg F. Ischemic heart disease by social class and form of smoking: the Copenhagen male study - 17 years' follow-up. Journal of Internal Medicine. 231:1992;477-483.
43. Pocock S.J., Cook D.G., Shaper A.G.et al. Social differences in ischemic heart disease in British men. Lancet. 2:1987;197-201.
44. Rimington J. Chronic bronchitis, smoking and social class. A study among working people in the towns of mid and east Cheshire. Brit. J. Dis. Chest. 63:1969;193-205.
45. Higgins M.W., Keller J.B., Metzner H.L. Smoking, socio-economic status and chronic respiratory disease. American Review of Respiratory Disease. 116:1977;403-410.
46. Lebowitz M.D. The relationship of socio-environmental factors to the prevalence of obstructive lung diseases and other chronic conditions. Journal of Chronic Diseases. 30:1977;599-611.
47. Levnadsförhållanden. Välfärd och ojämlikhet i 20-årsperpektiv 1975-1995. Rapport nr 91. Stockholm: SCB; 1997.
48. Backlund I, Peterson S, Diderichsen F. Sjukdomsbördan i Sverige - en svensk DALY-kalkyl. Folkhälsoinstitutet 1998:50. Stockholm; 1999.
49. Ljung R, Diderichsen F. The socio-economic dimensions to inequalities in the burden of disease in Sweden. MPH thesis. Stockholm: Karolinska Institute; 2002.
50. Diderichsen F. Sjukdomsbördans fördelning och orsaker. Report. Stockholm: National Institute of Public Health; 1999 [Mimeo].
51. Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern epidemiology. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1998.
52. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H. Epidemiological research. Belmont (CA): Life Learning Publications; 1986.
53. Hallqvist J. Socio-economic differences in myocardial infarction risk: epidemiological analyses of causes and mechanisms. Doctoral thesis. Stockholm: Karolinska Institute; 1998.
54. Jakobsson K. Myocardial infarction incidence in socio-economic groups - differences and time trends in Stockholm County during 1985-1996. MPH thesis, 2000:5. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Mathematical Statistics; 2000.
55. Reuterwall C., Hallqvist J., Ahlbom A., De Faire U., Diderichsen F., Hogstedt C. Higher relative, but lower absolute risks of myocardial infarction in women than in men: analysis of some major risk factors in the SHEEP study. The SHEEP Study Group. Journal of Internal Medicine. 246(2):1999;161-174.