Table 2 Statements by Cluster to the focus prompt “To be useful, a health equity tool should…”
From: Critical considerations for the practical utility of health equity tools: a concept mapping study
Cluster 1: Evaluation for Improvement | |
1. | Be linked to Action Research |
5. | Have a clear feedback loop to improve practice |
10. | Have a clear intended outcome (e.g., is the tool intended to help you assess if there’s an inequity? To improve equity of an existing program? etc.) |
27. | Assist program planners to improve the equity of their programs |
33. | Provide further information or support after completing the tool, such as future steps and strategies to apply after identifying gaps or areas requiring attention |
34. | Engage the client or patient in thinking beyond the individual to the social factors impacting health: consciousness raising or thought-inspiring. |
37. | Lead to the identification of areas for improvement in policy/program |
45. | Help define priorities |
47. | Be useful for program evaluation |
53. | Include a plan to evaluate after use |
56. | Make sense to public health clients |
64. | Be evaluated |
Cluster 2: User Friendliness | |
3. | Be applicable to a diverse range of situations and program areas |
4. | Be a living document that can be updated following evaluations as to how the organization/workplace is doing to live up to a policy |
12. | Guide your thought process |
13. | Help the user to determine relevant strategies to address the inequity |
14. | Be concise |
18. | Have obvious relevance |
24. | Have a clear purpose and objectives |
29. | Be easy to understand |
32. | Be short |
36. | Be useful at various levels of the organization, front line work and policy making |
39. | Be easy to use |
40. | Be simple |
50. | Be quick for a public health practitioner to use |
59. | Give practical ways for the health care sector/providers to engage patient as full partner |
62. | Be clear |
66. | Use plain language |
Cluster 3: Explicit Theoretical Background | |
6. | Provide references for the theoretical foundations of the tool |
7. | Have some context (e.g. background information) |
38. | Provide an explanation of the theoretical foundations of the tool |
44. | Be grounded in theories of health equity that illustrate how health inequities can be reduced |
46. | Provide a clear definition of the fundamental principles of health equity (what is means, why it is important, practicalities, costs and limitations) |
61. | Define equity |
65. | Be grounded in theories of health equity that illustrate how health inequities occur |
Cluster 4: Templates and Tools | |
17. | Provide a way of synthesizing across the steps of the process to lead to a conclusion about what needs to be done |
19. | Provide examples of how the tool can be used |
20. | Describe appropriate applications of the tool |
22. | Describe inappropriate applications for using the tool |
23. | Provide links to tangible step-by-step strategies to act on any identified barriers to health equity. Ideally, this would be interactive with tailored suggestions based on assessment results |
26. | Provide examples of how the tool has been used |
28. | Provide a template or worksheets that can be completed by the user |
30. | Provide a clear set of steps that help the user to determine whether a health inequity exists |
51. | Provide guidance on determining strategies to address inequity |
52. | Provide resources where the user can go from additional information or help |
55. | Show how to work through the process of defining an inequity and determining strategies to address it |
58. | Provide core sets of equity indicators |
60. | Provide examples of how the tool could be used |
67. | Clearly define appropriate context for use of the tool (organization-level policy assessment vs. front-line direct service program assessment) |
Cluster 5: Equity Competencies | |
2. | Extend the definition of culture to include how institutions may impact how people receive/experience care (i.e. religious upbringing, foster care, correctional institutions, street culture) |
9. | Provide connections to a community of practice, or people to discuss health equity with |
11. | Encourage the inclusion of harm reduction strategies to improve peoples’ health |
16. | Be filtered through all the public health lenses |
25. | Guide people through critical reflexivity exercise/mindfulness – how they show up to work, what things colour their lens of the world, how they may be a health care provider, but show up with their patient as a judge or minister |
31. | Encourage compassion for both the health care worker and client |
35. | Engage the provider in thinking beyond the individual to the social factors impacting health: consciousness raising or thought-inspiring |
41. | Be grounded in quality improvement |
42. | Explore how stigma from health care sector plays out in the services and supports we provide |
43. | Take health literacy into account |
48. | Be inclusive of users of programs |
54. | Operate from a spirit of curiosity |
57. | Take into account people’s trauma histories |
Cluster 6: Nothing about Me without Me – Client Engaged | |
8. | Include the participation of those affected by health inequities |
15. | Point out ways that health care may be neglecting particular populations for more “favourable” populations |
21. | Be inclusive of the health needs of people who use substances |
49. | Feed courage to health care providers to be able to provide some level of care to anyone who walks through the door as being in the right place |
63. | Encourage health care providers to examine how they can provide more culturally competent, trauma-informed, care |