Investigating inconsistencies regarding health equity in select World Health Organization texts: a critical discourse analysis of health promotion, social determinants of health, and urban health texts, 2008–2016

There is misalignment with the WHO's stated approaches to tackle health inequity and its discourses around health equity. This incongruence increases the likelihood of pursuing short-term solutions and not sustainably addressing the root causes of health inequity. Critical discourse analysis' focus on power allows for understanding why 'radical' approaches are not explicitly expressed to ensure that governments will be agreeable to addressing health inequity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Global and Public Health
Published
2024-12-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s44263-024-00106-w
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Investigating inconsistencies regarding health equity in select World Health Organization texts: a critical discourse analysis of health promotion, social determinants of health, and urban health texts, 2008–2016

Jesse B. Bump, Arjumand Siddiqi, Theresa Enright, Michelle Amri et al.
8 citations
BMC Global and Public Health
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
5.40
article

Investigating inconsistencies regarding health equity in select World Health Organization texts: a critical discourse analysis of health promotion, social determinants of health, and urban health texts, 2008–2016

Jesse B. Bump, Arjumand Siddiqi, Theresa Enright, Michelle Amri, Patricia O’Campo, Erica Di Ruggiero
article en
8 citations

Abstract

There is misalignment with the WHO's stated approaches to tackle health inequity and its discourses around health equity. This incongruence increases the likelihood of pursuing short-term solutions and not sustainably addressing the root causes of health inequity. Critical discourse analysis' focus on power allows for understanding why 'radical' approaches are not explicitly expressed to ensure that governments will be agreeable to addressing health inequity.

BMC Global and Public HealthVol. 2(1)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), St. Michael's Hospital (CA), Harvard University (US), University of British Columbia (CA), University of Toronto (CA), University of Bergen (NO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
5.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.