While in the Nordic countries we have well-developed welfare policies and several structural, statutory measures in place aiming to promote public health, studies from these countries are often absent from systematic reviews of research literature assessing the effects of policy measures designed to promote health. Using adolescent health promotion and efforts related to primary prevention of obesity as an example, this short commentary aims to illustrate the paucity of well-designed studies investigating the effects of public health policies affecting adolescents. This paper argues that the Nordic research community is in a good position to help fill this gap, and to contribute more widely to the international literature on evaluation of policy interventions.
HoffmannFAllersKRombeyT, et al. Nearly 80 systematic reviews were published each day: observational study on trends in epidemiology and reporting over the years 2000–2019. J Clin Epidemiol2021;138:1–11. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.022
2.
PanterJAndersenPTAroAR, et al. Obesity prevention: a systematic review of setting-based interventions from Nordic countries and the Netherlands. J Obesity2018;12:1–34. 7093260. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7093260
3.
NallySCarlinABlackburnNE, et al. The effectiveness of school-based interventions on obesity-related behaviours in primary school children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Children2021;8:489. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8060489
4.
FlodgrenGMHelleveALobsteinT, et al. Primary prevention of overweight and obesity in adolescents: an overview of systematic reviews. Obesity Rev2020;21:e13102. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.13102
5.
GuyattGHOxmanADKunzR, et al. What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?BMJ2008;336:995. doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39490.551019.BE
6.
TsapasAAvgerinosIKaragiannisT, et al. Comparative effectiveness of glucose-lowering drugs for type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med2020;173:278–286. doi: 10.7326/M20-0864
7.
BESSI (Behavioural, Environmental, Social and Systems Interventions (for pandemic preparedness)). 2020. See https://www.bessi-collab.net/ (accessed 13 September 2022).
8.
Deloitte. The Nordic social welfare model. Lessons for reform. Report 2020. See www.deloitte.com/insights (accessed 13 September 2022).
9.
CSDH (Commission on Social Determinants of Health). Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Final Report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2008.
10.
MackenbachJPMcKeeM.A comparative analysis of health policy performance in 43 European countries. Eur J Public Health2013;23:195–344. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.022
11.
ScheffelsJLavikR.Out of sight, out of mind? Removal of point-of-sale tobacco displays in Norway. Tobacco Control2013;22:e37–e42. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050341
12.
RoomR.Effects of alcohol controls: Nordic research traditions. Drug and Alcohol Rev2004;23:43–53.
13.
RossowI.The alcohol advertising ban in Norway: effects on recorded alcohol sales. Drug Alcohol Rev2021;40:1392–1395. doi: 10.1111/dar.13289
14.
RossowINorströmT.The use of epidemiology in alcohol research. Addiction2012;108:20–25. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.04031.x
World Health Organization. Assessing the existing evidence base on school food and nutrition policies: a scoping review. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2021.
19.
World Health Organization. Food marketing exposure and power and their associations with food-related attitudes, beliefs and behaviours: a narrative review. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2022.
20.
Nordic Council of Ministers. A better life through diet and physical activity. Nordic Plan of Action on better health and quality of life through diet and physical activity. Copenhagen: ANP, 2006;746.
21.
GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Working Group.2022. See https://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/ (accessed 13 September 2022).
22.
GuyattGHOxmanADVistGE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ2008; 336:924–926.
23.
RutterHSavonaNGlontiK, et al. The need for a complex systems model of evidence for public health. Lancet2017;390:2602–2604. doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31267-9
24.
FischerAJThrelfallAMeahS, et al. The appraisal of public health interventions: an overview. J Public Health2013;35:488–494. doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdt076
SavonaNMacauleyTAguiarA, et al. Identifying the views of adolescents in five European countries on the drivers of obesity using group model building. Eur J Public Health2021;24;31:391–396. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckaa251
ESPAD (The European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs). See http://www.espad.org/ (accessed 13 September 2022).
29.
BudisavljevicSArnarssonAHamrikZ, et al. Improving adolescent health: translating health behaviour in school-aged children evidence into policy. J Adol Health2020;66:S9e–S11.
