scholarly journals Participatory research in health intervention studies involving migrants: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kieran Rustage ◽  
Alison Crawshaw ◽  
Saliha Majeed-Hajaj ◽  
Anna Deal ◽  
Laura B Nellums ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Power Distribution ◽  
Active Participation ◽  
Health Intervention ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Participatory Approaches ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Implementation Analysis

Objective To analyse the use of participatory approaches in research of health interventions for migrants, and how utilised approaches embody core participatory principles of democracy and power distribution. Design A systematic review of original articles. Electronic searchers were carried out in the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health and PsychINFO (from inception to Nov 2020). Eligibility criteria for study selection The analysis included original peer reviewed research which reported on attempts to develop and implement a health intervention for migrants using participatory approaches. We defined migrants as foreign born individuals; studies using definitions demonstrably outside of this were excluded. Only articles reporting the full research cycle (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination) were included. Data extraction Information related to who was involved in research (migrants or other non academic stakeholders), the research stage at which they were involved (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination), and how this involvement aligned with the core principles of participatory research, categorising studies as exhibiting active, pseudo, or indirect participation of migrants. Results 1793 publication were screened of which 28 were included in our analysis. We found substantial variation in the application of participatory research approaches: across 168 individual research stages analysed across the 28 studies, we recorded 46 instances of active participation of migrants; 30 instances of proxy participation; and 24 instances of indirect participation. Whilst all studies involved at least one non-academic stakeholder group in at least one stage of the research, just two studies exhibited evidence of active participation of migrants across all research stages. Conclusions These data highlight important shortfalls in the inclusion of migrant groups in developing health interventions that affect their lives and suggest a more rigorous and standardised approach to defining and delivering participatory research is urgently needed to improve the quality of participatory research. Registration This review followed PRISMA guidelines and is registered on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/2bnz5)

scholarly journals Participatory approaches in the development of health interventions for migrants: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e053678
Author(s):  
Kieran Rustage ◽  
Alison Crawshaw ◽  
Saliha Majeed-Hajaj ◽  
Anna Deal ◽  
Laura Nellums ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Active Participation ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Participatory Approaches ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Implementation Analysis

ObjectiveAnalysis of participatory approaches to developing health interventions for migrants and how approaches embody core participatory principles of inclusivity and democracy.DesignA systematic review of original articles. Electronic searches within the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health and PsychINFO (from inception—November 2020).Eligibility criteria for study selectionOriginal peer-reviewed articles reporting research to develop and implement a health intervention for migrants, incorporating participatory approaches. We defined migrants as foreign-born individuals. Only articles reporting the full research cycle (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination) were included.Data extractionWe extracted information related to who was involved in research (migrants or other non-academic stakeholders), the research stage at which they were involved (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination), the method of their involvement and how this aligned with the core principles of participatory research—categorising studies as exhibiting active or pseudo (including proxy and indirect) participation.Results1793 publications were screened, of which 28 were included in our analysis. We found substantial variation in the application of participatory approaches in designing health interventions targeting migrants: across 168 individual research stages analysed across the 28 studies, we recorded 46 instances of active participation of migrants, 30 instances of proxy participation and 24 instances of indirect participation. All studies involved non-academic stakeholders in at least one stage of the research, only two studies exhibited evidence of active participation of migrants across all research stages. Evidence is limited due to the variability of terms and approaches used.ConclusionsImportant shortfalls in the meaningful inclusion of migrants in developing health interventions exist, suggesting a more rigorous and standardised approach is warranted to better define and deliver participatory research and improve quality.RegistrationThis review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines and is registered on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/2bnz5).

scholarly journals Black American and Latinx Parent/Caregiver Participation in Digital Health Obesity Interventions for Children: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Sanchez-Flack ◽  
Joanna Buscemi ◽  
Alexander O'Donnell ◽  
Margaret H. Clark Withington ◽  
Marian Fitzgibbon
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Obesity Prevention ◽  
Weight Status ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Health Intervention ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Black American ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Prevention Interventions

Parents/caregivers are consistently described as integral targets given their influential role in supporting and managing behaviors such as diet and physical activity. Identifying effective obesity prevention interventions to enhance and sustain parent participation is needed. Digital obesity prevention interventions are a promising strategy to improve parent/caregiver participation. Digital health interventions demonstrate acceptable participation and retention among parents/caregivers. However, our understanding of digital obesity prevention interventions targeting Black American and Latinx parents/caregivers is limited. This systematic review aims to identify Black American and Latinx parents'/caregivers' level of participation in digital obesity prevention and treatment interventions and determine the relationship between parent/caregiver participation and behavioral and weight status outcomes. This review adheres to PRISMA guidelines and is registered in PROSPERO. Eligibility criteria include: intervention delivered by digital technology, targeted Black American and Latinx parents/caregivers of young children (2–12 years), reported parent/caregiver participation outcomes, targeted diet or physical activity behaviors, and randomized controlled trial study design. Searches were conducted in September 2020 in ERIC, PsychInfo, PubMed, and Web of Science. Initial searches returned 499 results. Four reviewers screened records against eligibility criteria and 12 studies met inclusion criteria. Across all studies, parent/caregiver participation ranged from low to high. Only half of the included studies reported significant improvements in behavioral or weight status outcomes for parents/caregivers and/or children. Of these studies, three reported high parental/caregiver participation rates, and three reported high satisfaction rates. These findings suggest that participation and satisfaction may impact behavior change and weight status. The small number of studies indicates that additional research is needed to determine whether engagement or other factors predict responsiveness to the digital health intervention. Our results lay the groundwork for developing and testing future digital health interventions with the explicit goal of parental/caregiver participation and considers the need to expand our digital health intervention research methodologies to address obesity inequities among diverse families better.

scholarly journals An assessment of the extent to which the contents of PROSPERO records meet the systematic review protocol reporting items in PRISMA-P

F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 773
Author(s):  
Alison Booth ◽  
Alex S. Mitchell ◽  
Andrew Mott ◽  
Sophie James ◽  
Sarah Cockayne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Single Entry ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Source Of Information

Background: PROSPERO is an international prospective register for systematic review protocols. Many of the registrations are the only available source of information about planned methods. This study investigated the extent to which records in PROSPERO contained the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Methods: A random sample of 439 single entry PROSPERO records of reviews of health interventions registered in 2018 was identified. Using a piloted list of 19 PRISMA-P items, divided into 63 elements, two researchers independently assessed the registration records. Where the information was present or not applicable to the review, a score of 1 was assigned. Overall scores were calculated and comparisons made by stage of review at registration, whether or not a meta-analysis was planned and whether or not funding/sponsorship was reported. Results: Some key methodological details, such as eligibility criteria, were relatively frequently reported, but much of the information recommended in PRISMA-P was not stated in PROSPERO registrations. Considering the 19 items, the mean score was 4.8 (SD 1.8; median 4; range 2-11) and across all the assessed records only 25% (2081/8227) of the items were scored as reported. Considering the 63 elements, the mean score was 33.4 (SD 5.8; median 33; range 18-47) and overall, 53% (14,469/27,279) of the elements were assessed as reported. Reporting was more frequent for items required in PROSPERO than optional items. The planned comparisons showed no meaningful differences between groups. Conclusions: PROSPERO provides reviewers with the opportunity to be transparent in their planned methods and demonstrate efforts to reduce bias. However, where the PROSPERO record is the only available source of a priori reporting, there is a significant shortfall in the items reported, compared to those recommended. This presents challenges in interpretation for those wishing to assess the validity of the final review.

Sexual Health Interventions for Racial/Ethnic Minorities Using Community-Based Participatory Research: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 109019812110083
Author(s):  
Caravella McCuistian ◽  
Bridgette Peteet ◽  
Kathy Burlew ◽  
Farrah Jacquez
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Disparities ◽  
Sexual Health ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Target Group ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Racial Ethnic

Background Racial/ethnic minorities (REMs) continue to carry the burden of sexual health disparities in the United States, including increased health risks and lower proportions of preventative care. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been useful in developing interventions aimed at reducing these disparities. Specifically, partnership with the target group members has resulted in more culturally relevant intervention strategies. Aim The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze the existing research on sexual health interventions targeting U.S. REMs that were developed using CBPR, to highlight the role target group members played in the development of these interventions, and to explore the benefits and outcomes of these partnerships. Method Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guided the search of 46 thesauri terms for CBPR, sexual health, and REMs across six databases. Results The initial search yielded 805 identified studies. After applying limiters, reviewing abstracts, and doing a full-text review, 24 appropriate studies were retained. The key findings indicated significant intervention outcomes such as increased health knowledge, attitude change, and behavioral intention that could reduce sexual risk-taking behaviors. Twelve studies detailed the methods for partnering with target group members to formulate interventions, highlighting the benefits related to recruitment, retention, and cultural relevance. Discussion CBPR is well-positioned to address sexual health disparities among REMs. While community partnership strategies vary, the findings yield evidence that CBPR addressing sexual health disparities is achievable, can influence the effectiveness of interventions, and should be considered as an orientation in future sexual health research.

scholarly journals Examining Challenges to Incorporate End Users in the Development of Digital Health Interventions: Protocol for a Systematic Review (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Duffy ◽  
Greg Christie ◽  
Sylvain Moreno
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
End Users ◽  
Digital Design ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Healthcare Outcomes ◽  
Eligibility Criteria

BACKGROUND Digital Health Interventions (DHIs) are rapidly evolving the landscape of healthcare. Multiple studies have shown their propensity to extend both the quality and reach of interventions. However, failure to improve DHI development is linked to failed uptake and health outcomes. This dilemma is further conflicted by the colliding backdrops of the digital and health industries respectively, which approach, understand and involve end users differently in the framing of a DHI. OBJECTIVE The objective of this systematic review is to assess the challenges to incorporate end users in the development of digital health interventions, to identify emerging hybridised solutions, and to identify limitations and gaps for areas of future investigation. METHODS The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-P) will be used to structure this protocol. A systematic search of the PsycInfo, PubMed (Medline), Web of Science, CINAHL and IEEE Xplore databases will be conducted. Additionally, the PerSPEcTiF guidelines for complex interventions will be consulted. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts of the identified references and select studies according to the eligibility criteria. Any discrepancies will then be discussed and resolved. Two reviewers will independently extract and validate data from the included studies into a standardised form and conduct quality appraisal. RESULTS As of February 2020, we have completed a preliminary literature search examining challenges to incorporate end users in the development of DHI. Systematic searches, data extraction and analysis, and writing of the systematic review are expected to be completed by August 2021. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review aims to provide an effective summary of challenges to incorporate end users in the development of DHIs. Results from this review will provide an evidence base for a more harmonised approach to end users that satisfies the needs of healthcare outcomes and digital design and development respectively.

A Systematic Review of Workplace-Based Employee Health Interventions and Their Impact on Sleep Duration Among Shift Workers

2021 ◽  
pp. 216507992110209
Author(s):  
Rebecca Robbins ◽  
Phoenix Underwood ◽  
Chandra L. Jackson ◽  
Giradin Jean-Louis ◽  
Shreya Madhavaram ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sleep Duration ◽  
Light Exposure ◽  
Employee Health ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Shift Workers ◽  
Workplace Interventions ◽  
Shift Worker ◽  
The Impact

Background: Shift work is associated with long-term health risks. Workplace-based health interventions hold promise for improving or maintaining the health of shift workers; yet, the impact of workplace-based interventions on shift worker sleep duration has not been assessed. We conducted a systematic review of workplace interventions on shift worker sleep. Methods: We conducted searches in PubMed, Web of Knowledge, EMBASE, Scopus, and PsycINFO ( n = 6,868 records) of all studies published through May 15, 2019. Eligibility criteria included the following: (a) individuals aged ≥18 years; (b) a workplace-based employee intervention; (c) an employee population comprised predominantly of shift workers (>50%); and (d) sleep duration as a study outcome. Findings: Twenty workplace interventions met eligibility criteria. Mean intervention duration was 125 ( SD = 187) days and mean sample size was 116 employees ( SD = 256) with a mean age of 36.4 years ( SD = 6.5). Interventions most commonly focused on light exposure (25%) or shift timing (25%), followed by sleep hygiene (20%). Most interventions were conducted in the health care and social assistance sector (60%). Study quality on average was 64% ( SD = 7%). A majority of the studies found that a workplace-based health intervention was associated with a desirable increase in 24-hour total sleep duration (55%). The overall average increase in daily employee sleep duration achieved by interventions ranged for RCT studies from 0.34 to 0.99 hours and for non-RCT studies from 0.02 to 1.15 hours. Conclusions/Applications to Practice: More than half of the employee health interventions, especially yoga or mindfulness interventions, resulted in a desirable increase in sleep duration. Workplaces hold promise as an avenue? for delivering programs and policies that aim to improve sleep duration among shift workers.

scholarly journals Lifestyle Interventions through Participatory Research: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review of Alcohol and Other Breast Cancer Behavioural Risk Factors

2022 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 980
Author(s):  
Jessica A. Thomas ◽  
Emma R. Miller ◽  
Paul R. Ward
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Lifestyle Modification ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Translation ◽  
Participatory Approaches ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Academic Researchers

Breast cancer is one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers in women globally. Sex and advancing age represent the dominant risk factors, with strong evidence of alcohol as a modifiable risk factor. The carcinogenic nature of alcohol has been known for over twenty years; however, this has failed to translate into significant behavioural, practice, or policy change. As a result, women have not benefitted from this research and, by extension, have been exposed to unnecessary breast cancer risk. Participatory research presents a solution to research translation in public health through the collaboration of impacted populations with academics in research. This systematic review examines peer-reviewed research studies where participants were involved in the research process and the outcomes related to breast cancer prevention (either alcohol or broader lifestyle modification). Seven of the eight studies reported positive effects, and the collaboration between academic researchers and impacted populations may have supported positive outcomes. Women were receptive and responsive to participatory approaches, and their participation is important to address socially entrenched behaviours such as alcohol consumption. Participatory research presents opportunities for future interventions to improve (or address) modifiable risk factors for breast cancer.

scholarly journals An assessment of the extent to which the contents of PROSPERO records meet the systematic review protocol reporting items in PRISMA-P

F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 773
Author(s):  
Alison Booth ◽  
Alex S. Mitchell ◽  
Andrew Mott ◽  
Sophie James ◽  
Sarah Cockayne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Single Entry ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Source Of Information

Background: PROSPERO is an international prospective register for systematic review protocols. Many of the registrations are the only available source of information about planned methods. This study investigated the extent to which records in PROSPERO contained the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Methods: A random sample of 439 single entry PROSPERO records of reviews of health interventions registered in 2018 was identified. Using a piloted list of 19 PRISMA-P items, divided into 63 elements, two researchers independently assessed the registration records. Where the information was present or not applicable to the review, a score of 1 was assigned. Overall scores were calculated and comparisons made by stage of review at registration, whether or not a meta-analysis was planned and whether or not funding/sponsorship was reported. Results: Some key methodological details, such as eligibility criteria, were relatively frequently reported, but much of the information recommended in PRISMA-P was not stated in PROSPERO registrations. Considering the 19 items, the mean score was 4.8 (SD 1.8; median 4; range 2-11) and across all the assessed records only 25% (2081/8227) of the items were scored as reported. Considering the 63 elements, the mean score was 33.4 (SD 5.8; median 33; range 18-47) and overall, 53% (14,469/27,279) of the elements were assessed as reported. Reporting was more frequent for items required in PROSPERO than optional items. The planned comparisons showed no meaningful differences between groups. Conclusions: PROSPERO provides reviewers with the opportunity to be transparent in their planned methods and demonstrate efforts to reduce bias. However, where the PROSPERO record is the only available source of a priori reporting, there is a significant shortfall in the items reported, compared to those recommended. This presents challenges in interpretation for those wishing to assess the validity of the final review.

scholarly journals Workshop: Active participation of migrants, refugees, and ethnic minorities in public health research

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Promotion ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Migrant Health ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Active Participation ◽  
Refugee Health ◽  
Participatory Approaches

Abstract To introduce the relevance, benefits and challenges of participatory approaches in public health research addressing issues of migrant and refugee health. Participation of stakeholders has a long tradition in fields of public health research, in particular in community-based research and health promotion. Today, increasing demands of grant agencies and policymakers in Europe challenge researchers to include stakeholders in all processes of health research. Active participation of migrants and refugees poses complex challenges for public health research including but, going beyond language problems and risks of stereotyping. The specific objectives of this workshop are: (1) to introduce current approaches for participation and their adaptability for the context of health research with migrants and refugees, (2) to explore participation in three projects that deal with issues like improving quality health care among chronically ill women with immigration background, introducing a health mediator model for refugees as well as ethical issues in participatory research with refugees and ethnic minority groups and (3) to discuss benefits and challenges of participatory approaches intended to improve health and health care services of specific groups. The workshop will start with an introduction providing a short overview of definitions and key concepts. Substantive presentations showcase three participatory projects in migrant health. A panel discussion, led by experienced moderators, with Prof Thomas Abel (PI of the MIWOCA project presented), Prof Antonio Chiarenza (WHO-HPH Task Force on Migration, Equity & Diversity, member of the Steering Committee of the EUPHA section on Migrant Health), Prof Luis Saboga-Nunes (EUPHA health promotion section) and Prof Sibel Sakarya (Department of Public Health Koç University) will address benefits and challenges of participation in migrant and refugee health research. The panel will open into a discussion to integrate audience’s experience and questions on participatory research. The workshop will be closed by the chair’s summary of lessons learnt and perspectives for future directions. Key messages Public health research for and with migrants and refugees poses basic and specific challenges. Experience with PR demonstrates the benefits of migrants’ and refugees’ active participation and the importance of adequate contextualizing of the problems and potential solutions.

scholarly journals Exploring the evidence for the effectiveness of health interventions for COVID-19 targeting migrants: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e057985
Author(s):  
Stefania Mondello ◽  
Carmela Visalli ◽  
Firas Kobeissy ◽  
Laura Cacciani ◽  
Fabio Cruciani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Methodological Guidelines

IntroductionOwing to their inherent vulnerabilities, the burden of COVID-19 and particularly of its control measures on migrants has been magnified. A thorough assessment of the value of the interventions for COVID-19 tailored to migrants is essential for improving their health outcomes as well as promoting an effective control of the pandemic. In this study, based on evidence from primary biomedical research, we aimed to systematically identify health interventions for COVID-19 targeting migrants and to assess and compare their effectiveness. The review will be conducted within a programme aimed at defining and implementing interventions to control the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, funded by the Italian Ministry of Health and conducted by a consortium of Italian regional health authorities.Methods and analysesData sources will include the bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, LOVE Platform COVID-19 Evidence, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies must evaluate health interventions for COVID-19 in migrants. Two independent reviewers will screen articles for inclusion using predefined eligibility criteria, extract data of retained articles and assess methodological quality by applying the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Disagreements will be resolved through consensus or arbitrated by a third reviewer if necessary. In synthesising the evidence, we will structure results by interventions, outcomes and quality. Where studies are sufficiently homogenous, trial data will be pooled and meta-analyses will be performed. Data will be reported according to methodological guidelines for systematic review provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.Ethics and disseminationThis is a review of existing literature, and ethics approval is not required. We will submit results for peer-review publication and present at relevant conferences. The review findings will be included in future efforts to develop evidence-informed recommendations, policies or programmatic actions at the national and regional levels and address future high-quality research in public health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document