Tackling inequalities in health: the need for building a systematic evidence base
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Heat dissipation during magnetization reversal processes in magnetic nanoparticles (MNP), upon exposure to alternating magnetic fields (AMF), has been extensively studied in relation to applications in magnetic fluid hyperthermia (MFH). This current paper demonstrates the design, fabrication, and evaluation of an efficient instrument, operating on this principle, for use as (i) a non-contact, in vitro, real-time temperature monitor; (ii) a drug release analysis system (DRAS); (iii) a high flux density module for AMF-mediated MNP studies; and (iv) an in vivo coil setup for real-time, whole body thermal imaging. The proposed DRAS is demonstrated by an AMF-mediated drug release proof-of-principle experiment. Also, the technique described facilitates non-contact temperature measurements of specific absorption rate (SAR) as accurately as temperature measurements using a probe in contact with the sample. Numerical calculations estimating the absolute and root mean squared flux densities, and other MNP – AMF studies suggest that the proposed stacked planar coil module could be employed for calorimetry. Even though the proposed in vivo coil setup could be used for real-time, whole body thermal imaging (within the limitations due to issues of penetration depth), further design effort is required in order to enhance the energy transfer efficiency.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Given limitations in the evidence base on what works to address inequalities in health, QCA has potential to help identify conditions under which interventions do or do not exacerbate unequal outcomes, or conditions leading to differential uptake or impacts across sub-population groups.
“Given the limitations in the evidence base on what works to address inequalities in health, for instance [74], QCA has potential here, to help identify the conditions under which interventions do or do not exacerbate unequal outcomes, or the conditions that lead to differential uptake or impacts across sub-population groups.”
From The use of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to address causality in complex systems: a systematic review of research on public health interventions (2021) · cites this paper as [74]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Natural experiments: an underused tool for public health?
Petticrew, M., Cummins, S., Ferrell, C., Findlay, A., Higgins, C., Hoy, C., Kearns, A., & Sparks, L. (2005) · Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2004.11.008 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
Hanckel, B., Petticrew, M., Thomas, J., & Green, J. (2021) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-021-10926-2 · Cited by 147 · see citing works
Developing primary health clinical teams for public oral health services in Tasmania
Cane, R., & Butler, D. (2004) · Australian Dental Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1834-7819.2004.tb00068.x · Cited by 17 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mackenbach, J. P.
- Affiliations
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Mackenbach, J P
- Venue
- Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2003-03
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 162-162
- ISSN
- 0141-7681 (ISSN-L)
- 0143-005X
- 1470-2738
- PMC
- PMC1732400
- OpenAlex
- W2096911615
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 7.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
- Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Characterization and Applications of Magnetic Nanoparticles
- Keywords
- health disparities, evidence base, health equity
- MeSH terms
- Delivery of Health Care, Health Policy, Health Services Accessibility, Health Services Research, Humans, Socioeconomic Factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
