BackgroundTackling childhood obesity is one of the major contemporary public health policy challenges and vital in terms of addressing socioeconomic health inequalities.We aimed to systematically review studies of the effectiveness of interventions (individual, community and societal) operating via different approaches (targeted or universal) in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity-related outcomes amongst children.MethodsNine electronic databases were searched from start date to October 2012 along with website and grey literature searches. The review examined the best available international evidence from interventions that aimed to prevent obesity, treat obesity, or improve obesity-related behaviours (diet and/or physical activity) amongst children (aged 0-18 years) in any setting and country, so long as they provided relevant information and analysis on both socioeconomic status and obesity-related outcomes. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted using established mechanisms and narrative synthesis was conducted.ResultsWe located 23 studies that provided the ‘best available’ (strongest methodologically) international evidence. At the individual level (n = 4), there was indicative evidence that screen time reduction and mentoring health promotion interventions could be effective in reducing inequalities in obesity. For the community level interventions (n = 17), evidence was inconclusive - with some studies suggesting that school-based health promotion activities and community-based group-based programmes were effective in reducing obesity - others not. Societal level evaluations were few (n = 1). However, there was no evidence to suggest that any of these intervention types increase inequalities and several studies found that interventions could at least prevent the widening of inequalities in obesity. The majority of studies were from America and were of 6-12 year old children.ConclusionsThe review has found only limited evidence although some individual and community based interventions may be effective in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity-related outcomes amongst children but further research is required, particularly of more complex, societal level interventions and amongst adolescents.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-834) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The relationship between adverse individual socio-economic circumstances and suicidal behaviour is well established. However, the impact of adverse collective circumstances - such as the socio-economic context where people live - is less well understood. This systematic review explores the extent to which area-level socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with inequalities in suicidal behaviour and self-harm in Europe. We performed a systematic review (in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EconLit and Social Sciences Citation Index) from 2005 to 2015. Observational studies were included if they were based in Europe and had a primary suicidal behaviour and self-harm outcome, compared at least two areas, included an area-level measure of socio-economic disadvantage and were published in the English language. The review followed The Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for quality appraisal. We identified 27 studies (30 papers) from 14 different European countries. There was a significant association (in 25/27 studies, all of which were rated as of medium or high quality) between socioeconomic disadvantage and suicidal behaviour (and self-harm), particularly for men, and this was a consistent finding across a variety of European countries. Socio-economic disadvantage was found to have an independent effect in several studies whilst others found evidence of mediating contextual and compositional factors. There is strong evidence of an association between suicidal behaviours (and self-harm) and area-level socio-economic disadvantage in Europe, particularly for men. Suicide prevention strategies should take this into account.

Background:Socioeconomic inequalities in obesity are well established in high-income countries. There is a lack of evidence of the types of intervention that are effective in reducing these inequalities among adults.Objectives:To systematically review studies of the effectiveness of individual, community and societal interventions in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity among adults.Methods:Nine electronic databases were searched from start date to October 2012 along with website and grey literature searches. The review examined the best available international evidence (both experimental and observational) of interventions at an individual, community and societal level that might reduce inequalities in obesity among adults (aged 18 years or over) in any setting and country. Studies were included if they reported a body fatness-related outcome and if they included a measure of socio-economic status. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted using established mechanisms and narrative synthesis was conducted.Results:The ‘best available' international evidence was provided by 20 studies. At the individual level, there was evidence of the effectiveness of primary care delivered tailored weight loss programmes among deprived groups. Community based behavioural weight loss interventions and community diet clubs (including workplace ones) also had some evidence of effectiveness—at least in the short term. Societal level evaluations were few, low quality and inconclusive. Further, there was little evidence of long term effectiveness, and few studies of men or outside the USA. However, there was no evidence to suggest that interventions increase inequalities.Conclusions:The best available international evidence suggests that some individual and community-based interventions may be effective in reducing socio-economic inequalities in obesity among adults in the short term. Further research is required particularly of more complex, multi-faceted and societal-level interventions.

BackgroundTackling obesity is one of the major contemporary public health policy challenges and is vital in terms of addressing health inequalities.ObjectivesTo systematically review the effectiveness of interventions (individual, community and societal) in reducing socioeconomic inequalities in obesity among (1) children aged 0–18 years (including prenatal) and (2) adults aged ≥18 years, in any setting, in any country, and (3) to establish how such interventions are organised, implemented and delivered.Data sourcesNine electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and NHS Economic Evaluation Database were searched from database start date to 10 October 2011 (child review) and to 11 October 2012 (adult review). We did not exclude papers on the basis of language, country or publication date. We supplemented these searches with website and grey literature searches.Review methodsPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Experimental studies and observational studies with a duration of at least 12 weeks were included. The reviews considered strategies that might reduce existing inequalities in the prevalence of obesity [i.e. effective targeted interventions or universal interventions that work more effectively in low socioeconomic status (SES) groups] as well as those interventions that might prevent the development of inequalities in obesity (i.e. universal interventions that work equally along the SES gradient). Interventions that involved drugs or surgery and laboratory-based studies were excluded from the reviews. The initial screening of titles and abstracts was conducted by one reviewer with a random 10% of the sample checked by a second reviewer. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer and independently checked by a second reviewer. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis and narrative synthesis were conducted focusing on the ‘best-available’ evidence for each intervention type (defined in terms of study design and quality).ResultsOf 56,967 papers of inequalities in obesity in children, 76 studies (85 papers) were included, and of 70,730 papers of inequalities in obesity in adults, 103 studies (103 papers) were included. These studies suggested that interventions that aim to prevent, reduce or manage obesity do not increase inequalities. For children, there was most evidence of effectiveness for targeted school-delivered, environmental and empowerment interventions. For adults, there was most evidence of effectiveness for primary care-delivered tailored weight loss and community-based weight loss interventions, at least in the short term among low-income women. There were few studies of appropriate design that could be included on societal-level interventions, a clear limitation of the evidence base found.LimitationsThe reviews located few evaluations of societal-level interventions and this was probably because they included only experimental study designs. The quality assessment tool, although described as a tool for public health interventions, seemed to favour those that followed a more clinical model. The implementation tool was practical but enabled only a brief summary of implementation factors to be made. Most of the studies synthesised in the reviews were from outside the UK and related to women.ConclusionsThe reviews have found some evidence of interventions with the potential to reduce SES inequalities in obesity and that obesity management interventions do not increase health inequalities. More experimental studies of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions (particularly at the societal level) to reduce inequalities in obesity, particularly among adolescents and adult men in the UK, are needed.Study registrationThe studies are registered as PROSPERO CRD42011001740 and CRD42013003612.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.