↓ Skip to main content

An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
21 X users

Readers on

mendeley
744 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12939-014-0119-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olena Hankivsky, Daniel Grace, Gemma Hunting, Melissa Giesbrecht, Alycia Fridkin, Sarah Rudrum, Olivier Ferlatte, Natalie Clark

Abstract

IntroductionIn the field of health, numerous frameworks have emerged that advance understandings of the differential impacts of health policies to produce inclusive and socially just health outcomes. In this paper, we present the development of an important contribution to these efforts ¿ an Intersectionality-Based Policy Analysis (IBPA) Framework.MethodsDeveloped over the course of two years in consultation with key stakeholders and drawing on best and promising practices of other equity-informed approaches, this participatory and iterative IBPA Framework provides guidance and direction for researchers, civil society, public health professionals and policy actors seeking to address the challenges of health inequities across diverse populations. Importantly, we present the application of the IBPA Framework in seven priority health-related policy case studies.ResultsThe analysis of each case study is focused on explaining how IBPA: 1) provides an innovative structure for critical policy analysis; 2) captures the different dimensions of policy contexts including history, politics, everyday lived experiences, diverse knowledges and intersecting social locations; and 3) generates transformative insights, knowledge, policy solutions and actions that cannot be gleaned from other equity-focused policy frameworks.ConclusionThe aim of this paper is to inspire a range of policy actors to recognize the potential of IBPA to foreground the complex contexts of health and social problems, and ultimately to transform how policy analysis is undertaken.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 744 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 734 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 137 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 136 18%
Researcher 84 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 55 7%
Student > Bachelor 42 6%
Other 116 16%
Unknown 174 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 212 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 100 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 82 11%
Psychology 29 4%
Arts and Humanities 28 4%
Other 81 11%
Unknown 212 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,140,085
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#144
of 2,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,902
of 373,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#3
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 373,843 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.