P215 Effectiveness of community-based health promotion campaign methods on chlamydia screening uptake in young people: A mixed-methods systematic review

BackgroundThe UK National Chlamydia Screening Programme uses an opportunistic approach. Many programmes use campaigns to raise awareness of chlamydia screening in young people. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of campaigns on uptake of chlamydia screening in young people.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods systematic review of articles assessing the outcomes of community-based health-promotion campaigns to increase chlamydia screening in young people, their experiences of the campaigns and other facilitators and barriers to the conduct of the campaigns. We searched four databases for quantitative and qualitative studies with no language restrictions.Main resultsFrom 10 329 records identified, 19 studies (20 articles) were included in the review: 14 quantitative, 2 qualitative and 3 mixed methods. All studies with quantitative outcomes were before-after study designs or interrupted time series. The prediction interval for relative change (RC) in test counts ranged from 0.95 to 1.56, with a summary pooled estimate of RC 1.22 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.30, 13 studies, I2=97%). For test positivity rate, 95% prediction interval was 0.59 to 1.48, with a summary pooled estimate of RC 0.93 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.07, 8 studies, I2=91.8%). Large variation in characteristics between studies precluded exploring outcomes by type of campaign components. Seven major qualitative themes to improve screening were identified: targeting of campaigns; quality of materials and message; language; anonymity; use of technology; relevance; and variety of testing options.ConclusionsHealth promotion campaigns aiming to increase chlamydia testing in those aged 15–24 years may show some effectiveness in increasing overall numbers of tests, however numbers of positive tests do not follow the same trend. Qualitative findings indicate that campaigns require clear, relevant messaging that displays the full range of testing options and assures anonymity in order to be effective.

Download Full-text

Men’s sheds as community-based health promotion for men aged 50 plus: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review

Systematic Reviews ◽

10.1186/s13643-021-01762-x ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Birte Marie Albrecht ◽

Linda Foettinger ◽

Karin Bammann

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Promotion ◽

Mixed Methods ◽

Integrated Approach ◽

Well Being ◽

Evidence Base ◽

Current Evidence ◽

Subjective Well Being ◽

Community Based ◽

Current Evidence Base

Abstract Background Men are less likely to participate in health promotion. One approach to reach men is the concept of men’s sheds. This community-based health promotion concept brings older men together to engage in joint activities. Prior research revealed various health-related effects of men’s sheds, such as benefits for well-being and mental health. To strengthen the current evidence base of men’s sheds, a mixed-methods systematic review analysing the association between participation and self-rated health, subjective well-being, and social isolation will be conducted. Moreover, information on how to successfully implement men’s sheds will be gathered. Methods This mixed-methods systematic review will follow the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The databases MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, and OpenGrey and the websites of men’s sheds associations will be searched for publications. Additionally, a hand search in the reference lists of the included publications will be conducted. Qualitative and quantitative studies published in English, German, or French will be considered for inclusion. The quality of the selected studies will be assessed using the JBI critical appraisal checklists. Following the convergent integrated approach, quantitative data will be transformed into textual descriptions, and subsequently combined with data from qualitative studies as well as from the qualitative components of mixed-methods studies in a simultaneous data synthesis. Discussion The results of this systematic review will lead to a comprehensive understanding of the current evidence base regarding the effectiveness of men’s sheds. Furthermore, they will provide useful implications for the implementation of men’s sheds. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020219390

Download Full-text

Men’s Sheds as Community-based Health Promotion for Men Aged 50 Plus (MASH): Protocol for a Mixed-methods Systematic Review

10.21203/rs.3.rs-118163/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Birte Albrecht ◽

Linda Foettinger ◽

Karin Bammann

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Promotion ◽

Mixed Methods ◽

Social Isolation ◽

Well Being ◽

Evidence Base ◽

Current Evidence ◽

Community Based ◽

Data Synthesis ◽

Current Evidence Base

Abstract Background Men are exposed to different health risks than women. For instance, older men have an increased risk of social isolation. At the same time, they are less likely to participate in health promotion interventions and there is a lack of men-specific interventions. Men’s sheds are a concept of community-based health promotion for older men where they can engage in joint activities. Prior research revealed various health-related effects of men’s sheds, such as reduced social isolation and improved psychological well-being. Yet, only two reviews conducted in 2013 are available which both found an insufficient evidence base. Since the wider implementation of men’s sheds is a recent phenomenon, and most of the literature on men’s sheds has been published after 2013, a mixed-methods systematic review will be conducted to strengthen the current evidence base of men’s sheds by analysing their effectiveness regarding self-rated health, subjective well-being, and social isolation. Moreover, information on how to successfully implement men’s sheds will be gathered. Methods This mixed-methods systematic review will follow the guidelines of The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The databases Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, OpenGrey, and the websites of men’s sheds associations will be searched for publications. Additionally, a hand-search in the reference lists of the included publications will be conducted. Qualitative and quantitative studies published in English, German, or French will be considered for inclusion. The quality of the selected studies will be assessed using the JBI critical appraisal checklists. Following the convergent segregated approach, the data synthesis will be undertaken independently, and subsequently combined in a mixed-methods data synthesis.Discussion The results of this systematic review will lead to a comprehensive understanding of the current evidence base regarding the effectiveness of men’s sheds. Furthermore, they will provide useful implications for the implementation of men’s sheds. Systematic review registration The systematic review is registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number forthcoming).

Download Full-text