Cargando…

Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Given the heightened rhetorical prominence the World Health Organization has afforded to equity in the past half-century, it is important to better understand how equity has been referred to and its conceptual underpinning, which may have broader global implications. ELIGIB...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Amri, Michelle M., Jessiman-Perreault, Geneviève, Siddiqi, Arjumand, O’Campo, Patricia, Enright, Theresa, Di Ruggiero, Erica
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7931570/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33658033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01400-x
_version_ 1783660321844494336
author Amri, Michelle M.
Jessiman-Perreault, Geneviève
Siddiqi, Arjumand
O’Campo, Patricia
Enright, Theresa
Di Ruggiero, Erica
author_facet Amri, Michelle M.
Jessiman-Perreault, Geneviève
Siddiqi, Arjumand
O’Campo, Patricia
Enright, Theresa
Di Ruggiero, Erica
author_sort Amri, Michelle M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Given the heightened rhetorical prominence the World Health Organization has afforded to equity in the past half-century, it is important to better understand how equity has been referred to and its conceptual underpinning, which may have broader global implications. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles were included if they met inclusion criteria — chiefly the explicit discussion of the WHO’s concept of health equity, for example in terms of conceptualization and/or definitions. Articles which mentioned health equity in the context of WHO’s programs, policies, and so on, but did not discuss its conceptualization or definition were excluded. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: We focused on peer-reviewed literature by scanning Ovid MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases, and supplementing by hand-search. RESULTS: Results demonstrate the WHO has held — and continues to hold — ambiguous, inadequate, and contradictory views of equity that are rooted in different theories of social justice. CONCLUSIONS: Moving forward, the WHO should revaluate its conceptualization of equity and normative position, and align its work with Amartya Sen’s Capabilities Approach, as it best encapsulates the broader views of the organization. Further empirical research is needed to assess the WHO interpretations and approaches to equity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7931570
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79315702021-03-05 Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions Amri, Michelle M. Jessiman-Perreault, Geneviève Siddiqi, Arjumand O’Campo, Patricia Enright, Theresa Di Ruggiero, Erica Int J Equity Health Review BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Given the heightened rhetorical prominence the World Health Organization has afforded to equity in the past half-century, it is important to better understand how equity has been referred to and its conceptual underpinning, which may have broader global implications. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles were included if they met inclusion criteria — chiefly the explicit discussion of the WHO’s concept of health equity, for example in terms of conceptualization and/or definitions. Articles which mentioned health equity in the context of WHO’s programs, policies, and so on, but did not discuss its conceptualization or definition were excluded. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: We focused on peer-reviewed literature by scanning Ovid MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases, and supplementing by hand-search. RESULTS: Results demonstrate the WHO has held — and continues to hold — ambiguous, inadequate, and contradictory views of equity that are rooted in different theories of social justice. CONCLUSIONS: Moving forward, the WHO should revaluate its conceptualization of equity and normative position, and align its work with Amartya Sen’s Capabilities Approach, as it best encapsulates the broader views of the organization. Further empirical research is needed to assess the WHO interpretations and approaches to equity. BioMed Central 2021-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7931570/ /pubmed/33658033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01400-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Amri, Michelle M.
Jessiman-Perreault, Geneviève
Siddiqi, Arjumand
O’Campo, Patricia
Enright, Theresa
Di Ruggiero, Erica
Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions
title Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions
title_full Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions
title_fullStr Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions
title_full_unstemmed Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions
title_short Scoping review of the World Health Organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions
title_sort scoping review of the world health organization’s underlying equity discourses: apparent ambiguities, inadequacy, and contradictions
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7931570/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33658033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01400-x
work_keys_str_mv AT amrimichellem scopingreviewoftheworldhealthorganizationsunderlyingequitydiscoursesapparentambiguitiesinadequacyandcontradictions
AT jessimanperreaultgenevieve scopingreviewoftheworldhealthorganizationsunderlyingequitydiscoursesapparentambiguitiesinadequacyandcontradictions
AT siddiqiarjumand scopingreviewoftheworldhealthorganizationsunderlyingequitydiscoursesapparentambiguitiesinadequacyandcontradictions
AT ocampopatricia scopingreviewoftheworldhealthorganizationsunderlyingequitydiscoursesapparentambiguitiesinadequacyandcontradictions
AT enrighttheresa scopingreviewoftheworldhealthorganizationsunderlyingequitydiscoursesapparentambiguitiesinadequacyandcontradictions
AT diruggieroerica scopingreviewoftheworldhealthorganizationsunderlyingequitydiscoursesapparentambiguitiesinadequacyandcontradictions