Reacción a "A review identifies what most influences polarization on health issues"

Camacho-García et al. (2025) conduct a systematic literature review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, integrating 90 studies selected from three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science). In addition, the authors develop and use a tool for assessing the quality of scientific texts (QUEST) based on 20 indicators, which they make freely available.

This work has two main contributions. The first is the traceability and replicability of the review process. The second, no less important, is the identification of six major determinants of social polarization in health in the literature reviewed. These combine political, cognitive, technological, and social elements that explain how and why the population is divided on public health issues. This work therefore offers a useful interdisciplinary framework for future related research. Among the limitations to be taken into account, I would highlight the bias not only towards Western scenarios, as the authors warn, due to the languages read and the databases, but also towards the predominance of the US context, with very different characteristics in relation to the health system, which may condition the effect of the determinants identified.