scholarly journals Erratum to: A systematic review of the health and well-being impacts of school gardening: synthesis of quantitative and qualitative evidence

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Ohly ◽  
Sarah Gentry ◽  
Rachel Wigglesworth ◽  
Alison Bethel ◽  
Rebecca Lovell ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Ohly ◽  
Sarah Gentry ◽  
Rachel Wigglesworth ◽  
Alison Bethel ◽  
Rebecca Lovell ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo Lorenc ◽  
Mark Petticrew ◽  
Margaret Whitehead ◽  
David Neary ◽  
Stephen Clayton ◽  
...  

BackgroundCrime and fear of crime may impact negatively on health and well-being. Interventions to reduce crime and fear of crime, particularly interventions in the physical environment, may be a promising way to improve population-level well-being.Project components(1) Mapping review of theories and pathways; (2) systematic review of effectiveness; (3) systematic review of UK qualitative data; and (4) focus groups and interviews with stakeholders.Methods(1) The mapping review was a pragmatic non-systematic review focusing on theoretical literature and observational quantitative studies and development of a theoretical model of pathways. (2 and 3) The systematic reviews followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance. In total, 18 databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Science Citation Index were searched from inception to 2010. Studies presenting data on the built environment and the fear of crime were included. Quality assessment was conducted. Data synthesis was conducted narratively for the intervention review, with harvest plots to synthesise data on inequalities, and by thematic analysis for the review of qualitative evidence. (4) Semistructured interviews with nine stakeholders working in community safety and two focus groups with members of the public were conducted to inform the methods of the project and the dissemination of findings. Data were analysed thematically.Results(1) There are complex and often indirect links between crime, fear of crime, environment, and health and well-being at both individual and population levels. Fear of crime is associated with poorer health outcomes. There is considerable debate about the measurement of fear of crime. Both fear of crime and crime are associated with a range of environmental factors. (2) A total of 12,093 references were screened on abstract for the two systematic reviews. Of these, 47 effectiveness studies (22 controlled and 25 uncontrolled) were included in the systematic review of effectiveness, with 36 conducted in the UK, 10 in the USA and one in the Netherlands. There is some evidence that home security improvements and non-crime-related environmental improvements may improve some fear of crime outcomes. There is little evidence that the following reduce fear of crime: street lighting improvements, closed-circuit television, multicomponent environmental crime prevention programmes or regeneration programmes. The evidence on housing improvement is mixed. Very few data on the health and well-being outcomes of crime reduction interventions were located and the study quality overall is poor. (3) A total of 39 studies were included in the systematic review of qualitative data. Several factors in the physical environment are perceived to impact on fear of crime. However, factors in the local social environment appear to be more important as drivers of fear of crime. There is considerable evidence for limitations on physical activity as a result of fear of crime, but less for mental health impacts. (4) Stakeholders see fear of crime as harder to address than crime and as linked to health and well-being. Environmental interventions, such as Secured by Design, are widely used and positively regarded.LimitationsThe review is relatively restricted in its scope and a number of relevant interventions and themes are excluded. The underlying evidence base is of limited quality, particularly for the effectiveness review, and is heterogeneous.ConclusionsBroader social interventions appear more promising than crime-focused environmental interventions as a means of improving fear of crime, health and well-being. The qualitative evidence suggests that fear of crime may impact on physical activity. More broadly, crime and fear of crime appear to be linked to health and well-being mainly as aspects of socioeconomic disadvantage. This review indicates the following gaps in the literature: evaluation research on the health impacts of crime reduction interventions; more robust research on interventions to reduce fear of crime; systematic reviews of non-environmental interventions to reduce fear of crime and systematic reviews of qualitative evidence on other crime-related topics.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e043722
Author(s):  
Naomi Priest ◽  
Kate Doery ◽  
Mandy Truong ◽  
Shuaijun Guo ◽  
Ryan Perry ◽  
...  

IntroductionRacism is a critical determinant of health and health inequities for children and youth. This protocol aims to update the first systematic review conducted by Priest et al (2013), including a meta-analysis of findings. Based on previous empirical data, it is anticipated that child and youth health will be negatively impacted by racism. Findings from this review will provide updated evidence of effect sizes across outcomes and identify moderators and mediators of relationships between racism and health.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies that examine associations between experiences of racism and racial discrimination with health outcomes of children and youth aged 0–24 years. Exposure measures include self-reported or proxy reported systemic, interpersonal and intrapersonal racism. Outcome measures include general health and well-being, physical health, mental health, biological markers, healthcare utilisation and health behaviours. A comprehensive search of studies from the earliest time available to October 2020 will be conducted. A random effects meta-analysis will examine the average effect of racism on a range of health outcomes. Study-level moderation will test the difference in effect sizes with regard to various sample and exposure characteristics. This review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.Ethics and disseminationThis review will provide evidence for future research within the field and help to support policy and practice development. Results will be widely disseminated to both academic and non-academic audiences through peer-review publications, community summaries and presentations to research, policy, practice and community audiences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184055.


2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Lovell ◽  
Benedict W. Wheeler ◽  
Sahran L. Higgins ◽  
Katherine N. Irvine ◽  
Michael H. Depledge

2021 ◽  
pp. oemed-2020-107314
Author(s):  
Paige M Hulls ◽  
Rebecca C Richmond ◽  
Richard M Martin ◽  
Yanaina Chavez-Ugalde ◽  
Frank de Vocht

The published evidence on whether workplace health and well-being interventions are as effective in male-dominated industries compared with mixed-gender environments has not been synthesised. We performed a systematic review of workplace interventions aimed at improving employee health and well-being in male-dominated industries. We searched Web of Knowledge, PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Database and Web of Science for articles describing workplace interventions in male-dominated industries that address employee health and well-being. The primary outcome was to determine the effectiveness of the intervention and the process evaluation (intervention delivery and adherence). To assess the quality of evidence, Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Tool was used. Due to the heterogeneity of reported outcomes, meta-analysis was performed for only some outcomes and a narrative synthesis with albatross plots was presented. After full-text screening, 35 studies met the eligibility criteria. Thirty-two studies delivered the intervention face-to-face, while two were delivered via internet and one using postal mail. Intervention adherence ranged from 50% to 97%, dependent on mode of delivery and industry. 17 studies were considered low risk of bias. Albatross plots indicated some evidence of positive associations, particularly for interventions focusing on musculoskeletal disorders. There was little evidence of intervention effect on body mass index and systolic or diastolic blood pressure. Limited to moderate evidence of beneficial effects was found for workplace health and well-being interventions conducted within male-dominated industries. Such interventions in the workplace can be effective, despite a different culture in male-dominated compared with mixed industries, but are dependent on delivery, industry and outcome. CRD42019161283.


2017 ◽  
Vol 220 (8) ◽  
pp. 1207-1221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mireia Gascon ◽  
Wilma Zijlema ◽  
Cristina Vert ◽  
Mathew P. White ◽  
Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document