We undertook a synthesis of existing studies to re-evaluate the evidence on program mechanisms of intimate partner violence (IPV) universal screening and disclosure within a health care context by addressing how, for whom, and in what circumstances these programs work. Our review is informed by a realist review approach, which focuses on program mechanisms. Systematic, realist reviews can help reveal why and how interventions work and can yield information to inform policies and programs. A review of the scholarly literature from January 1990 to July 2010 identified 5046 articles, 23 of which were included in our study. We identified studies on 17 programs that evaluated IPV screening. We found that programs that took a comprehensive approach (i.e., incorporated multiple program components, including institutional support) were successful in increasing IPV screening and disclosure/identification rates. Four program components appeared to increase provider self-efficacy for screening, including institutional support, effective screening protocols, thorough initial and ongoing training, and immediate access/referrals to onsite and/or offsite support services. These findings support a multi-component comprehensive IPV screening program approach that seeks to build provider self-efficacy for screening. Further implications for IPV screening intervention planning and implementation in health care settings are discussed.

Disparities in preterm birth by race and ethnic group have been demonstrated in the United States. Recent research has focused on the impact of neighborhood context on racial disparities in pregnancy outcomes. The authors utilized vital-record birth certificate data and US Census data from eight geographic areas in four states (Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania) to examine the relation between neighborhood deprivation and preterm birth among non-Hispanic White and Black women. The years covered by the data varied by site and ranged from 1995 to 2001. Results were adjusted for maternal age and education, and specific attention was paid to racial and geographic differences in the relation between neighborhood deprivation and preterm birth. Preterm birth rates were higher for non-Hispanic Blacks (10.42–15.97%) than for non-Hispanic Whites (5.77–9.13%), and neighborhood deprivation index values varied substantially across the eight areas. A significant association was found between neighborhood deprivation and risk of preterm birth; for the first quintile of the deprivation index versus the fifth, the adjusted summary odds ratio was 1.57 (95% confidence interval: 1.41, 1.74) for non-Hispanic Whites and 1.15 (95% confidence interval: 1.08, 1.23) for non-Hispanic Blacks. In this study, deprivation at the neighborhood level was significantly associated with increased risk of preterm birth among both non-Hispanic White women and non-Hispanic Black women.

The recent global recession and concurrent rise in job loss makes unemployment insurance (UI) increasingly important to smooth patterns of consumption and keep households from experiencing extreme material poverty. In this paper, we undertake a realist review to produce a critical understanding of how and why UI policies impact on poverty and health in different welfare state contexts between 2000 and 2013. We relied on literature and expert interviews to generate an initial theory and set of propositions about how UI might alleviate poverty and mental distress. We then systematically located and synthesized peer-review studies to glean supportive or contradictory evidence for our initial propositions. Poverty and psychological distress, among unemployed and even the employed, are impacted by generosity of UI in terms of eligibility, duration and wage replacement levels. Though unemployment benefits are not intended to compensate fully for a loss of earnings, generous UI programs can moderate harmful consequences of unemployment.

Background: It is widely recognized that one’s health is influenced by a multitude of nonmedical factors, known as the social determinants of health (SDH). The SDH are defined as “the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age, and which are shaped by the distribution of money, power and resources at global, national and local levels”. Despite their influence on health, most of the SDH are targeted through government departments and ministries outside of the traditional health sector (e.g. education, housing). As such, the need for intersectoral and multisectoral approaches arises. Intersectoral and multisectoral approaches are thought to be essential to addressing many global health challenges our world faces today and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. There are various ways of undertaking intersectoral and multisectoral action, but there are three widely recognized approaches (Health in All Policies [HiAP], Healthy Cities, and One Health) that each have a unique focus. However, despite the widespread acceptance of the need for intersectoral and multisectoral approaches, knowledge around how to support, achieve and sustain multisectoral action is limited. The goal of this study is to assemble evidence from systematic approaches to reviewing the literature (e.g. scoping review, systematic review) that collate findings on facilitators/enablers and barriers to implementing various intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to health, to strengthen understanding of how to best implement health policies that work across sectors, whichever they may be. Methods: An umbrella review (i.e. review of reviews) is to be undertaken to collate findings from the peer-reviewed literature, specifically from Ovid MEDLINE and Scopus databases. This umbrella review protocol was developed following the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P), and study design informed by the PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Discussion: Countries that employ multisectoral approaches are better able to identify and address issues around poverty, housing and others, by working collaboratively across sectors, with multisectoral action by governments thought to be required to achieve health equity.

Despite the widespread acceptance of the need for intersectoral and multisectoral approaches, knowledge around how to support, achieve, and sustain multisectoral action is limited. While there have been studies that seek to collate evidence on multisectoral action with a specific focus (e.g., Health in All Policies [HiAP]), we postulated that successes of working cross-sectorally to achieve health goals with one approach can glean insights and perhaps translate to other approaches which work across sectors (i.e., shared insights across HiAP, Healthy Cities, One Health, and other approaches). Thus, the goal of this study is to assemble evidence from systematic approaches to reviewing the literature (e.g., scoping review, systematic review) that collate findings on facilitators/enablers of and barriers to implementing various intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to health, to strengthen understanding of how to best implement health policies that work across sectors, whichever they may be. This umbrella review (i.e., review of reviews) was informed by the PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews, yielding 10 studies included in this review. Enablers detailed are: (1) systems for liaising and engaged communication; (2) political leadership; (3) shared vision or common goals (win-win strategies); (4) education and access to information; and (5) funding. Barriers detailed were: (1) lack of shared vision across sectors; (2) lack of funding; (3) lack of political leadership; (4) lack of ownership and accountability; and (5) insufficient and unavailable indicators and data. These findings provide a rigorous evidence base for policymakers to inform intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to not only aid in the achievement of goals, such as the Sustainable Development Goals, but to work towards health equity.