Skip Navigation

The European Journal of Public Health 2008 18(5):438-439; doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckn087
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kemm, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Kemm, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.

Viewpoints

Comments on HIA forecast: cloudy with sunny spells

John Kemm

West Midlands Public Health Observatory, Birmingham, England, UK

Correspondence: e-mail: John.kemm@wmpho.org.uk

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

In her forecast, Thomson makes three criticisms of current Health Impact Assessment (HIA) practice. That it is unreasonable to expect decision makers to be influenced by HIA; that HIA fails to acknowledge the uncertainty attached to its predictions; and that the predictions in HIA are inadequately based on evidence. Each of these criticisms deserves consideration.


   Influence
 
The purpose of HIA is to assist decision makers and Thomson is right to focus attention on the relation between decision maker and . . . [Full Text of this Article]


   Admitting uncertainty
 

   Evidence for predictions
 

   Conclusion
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?