scholarly journals Homicides and socio-environmental determinants of health in Brazil: a systematic literature review

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clovis Wanzinack ◽  
Marcos Claudio Signorelli ◽  
Clóvis Reis

Abstract: Brazil currently has the highest absolute number of homicides in the world, which results from a complex range of factors. This study aimed at understanding the associations between socio-environmental determinants of health (SDH) and homicides in Brazil through a systematic literature review. The review followed PRISMA guidelines, selecting quantitative and qualitative studies published in Portuguese, English, and Spanish carried out between 2002 and 2017, available in the PubMed, MEDLINE, LILACS, SciELO and BVS-BIREME databases. Two trilingual reviewers tracked studies independently by basing on the eligibility criteria. We critically assessed the selected studies with the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) or the Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies, depending on the study design. We considered 60 studies and grouped their SDH into categories to develop a narrative synthesis about each SDH. These categories were: territory; race/ethnicity; gender; age; social inequalities and economic factors; development; education; work and employment; drugs and trafficking; other SDH. We found some SDH were more associated with homicides, such as being young, black, male, of low education level, and also people who lived in places of high social inequality, such as urban suburbs and agricultural frontiers. Unemployment and drug trafficking, as well as intersections between various SDH were also prominent. Education seems to be a protective factor for homicide. Despite the limited capacity of interpretation due to the high range of methodological approaches, this review shows the importance of considering SDH and their intersections when developing homicide prevention policies.

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 328-328
Author(s):  
Simona Kwon ◽  
Deborah Min ◽  
Stella Chong

Abstract Asian Americans are the fastest growing racial and ethnic minority group in the United States, whose population is aging considerably. Previous studies indicate that social isolation and loneliness disproportionately affects older adults and predicts greater physical, mental, and cognitive decline. A systematic literature review using PRISMA guidelines was conducted to address this emerging need to understand the scope of research focused on social isolation and loneliness among the disparity population of older Asian Americans. Four interdisciplinary databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and AgeLine; search terms included variations on social isolation, loneliness, Asian Americans, and older adults. Articles were reviewed based on six eligibility criteria: (1) research topic relevance, (2) study participants aged >60 years, (3) Asian immigrants as main participants, (4) conducted in the United States, (5) published between 1995-2019, and (6) printed in the English language. The search yielded 799 articles across the four databases and 61 duplicate articles were removed. Abstracts were screened for the 738 remaining studies, 107 of which underwent full-text review. A total of 56 articles met the eligibility criteria. Synthesis of our review indicates that existing research focuses heavily on Chinese and Korean American immigrant communities, despite the heterogeneity of the diverse Asian American population. Studies were largely observational and employed community-based sampling. Critical literature gaps exist surrounding social isolation and loneliness in Asian American older adults, including the lack of studies on South Asian populations. Future studies should prioritize health promotion intervention research and focus on diverse understudied Asian subgroups.


Author(s):  
Stefania Della Vecchia ◽  
Alessandra Tessa ◽  
Claudia Dosi ◽  
Jacopo Baldacci ◽  
Rosa Pasquariello ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sofia Banzhoff ◽  
Maria del Mar Ropero ◽  
Gabriele Menzel ◽  
Tatjana Salmen ◽  
Manfred Gross ◽  
...  

Playing a musical instrument can affect physical and mental health. A literature review was conducted to determine the prevalence of health problems among oboists, which medical conditions can be caused or exacerbated by playing, whether oboe playing can be a protective factor, and whether recommendations are possible as to who should or should not play the oboe. Searches in 7 databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SocIndex, PsyIndex, Psychinfo) yielded a total of 950 studies; after exclusion of duplicates and those not meeting eligibility criteria, 37 articles were selected for final analysis. In addition, Google Scholar and a musicology library served as additional sources, revealing another 6 publications for inclusion. As a result, some evidence was found for musculoskeletal problems, focal dystonia, stress velopharyngeal incompetence, increased intraocular pressure and glaucoma, gastroesophageal reflux disease, lower pulmonary function, disease transmission via instruments, and hearing loss due to noise exposure. Playing the oboe may be protective against obstructive sleep apnea. However, due to small sample sizes, uncertain reproducibility of findings, and lack of accurate descriptions of problems reported by oboists, far more evidence would be necessary to answer the research questions conclusively. There was no evidence for causal relationships, and thus no recommendations can be made regarding who should (not) play the oboe. To improve the quality of medical care for these musicians and to implement prevention strategies, future investigations with more in-depth instrument-specific analyses and higher numbers of participants are needed.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Martin ◽  
George Beckham

Abstract Background: Since World Rugby changed the laws regarding scrums in the 2013-2014 season, the sustained push phase of the scrum has increased in tactical importance. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic literature review was to examine the biomechanical demands during the sustained push phase of individual, unit, and full pack scrummaging. Methods: Pubmed, EBSCO (specifically and simultaneously searching Academic Search Premier, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus), and Google Scholar were searched for any research that presented force production in a live or simulated rugby scrum. Study quality was appraised using the National Institute of Health's Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Recorded scrum forces, positioning of players including joint angles, and testing procedures were extracted and narratively synthesized. Results: Twenty six studies were included in the review. 50% of included studies were rated good, 31% fair, and 19% poor. Major limitations included not reporting any effect size, statistical power, or reliability. Reported group mean values for average sustained forces against a machine generally ranged from 1000-2000 N in individual scrums and 4000-8000 N for full packs of male rugby players older than high school age. Individuals seem to optimize their force generation when their shoulders are set against scrum machine pads at approximately 40% of body height, with feet parallel, and with knee and hip angles around 120°. A 10% difference in pack force seems to be necessary for one pack to drive another back in the scrum, but little data exist to quantify differences in force production between winning and losing packs during live scrums. Data collection within studies was not standardized, making comparisons difficult. There is a lack of data in live scrums, and the current research indicates that machine scrums may not replicate many of the demands of live scrums. There is a lack of data for female rugby players. Conclusions: This review indicates an optimal individual body position for players to strive to achieve during scrummaging, consisting of a low body height (40% of stature) and large extended hip and knee angles (120° each).


Author(s):  
Yasmin M. Hussein ◽  
Stephanie Spero ◽  
Alexander Dean Bracken ◽  
Deborah Fish Ragin

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 545-557
Author(s):  
Susanne M Maassen ◽  
Anne Marie J W Weggelaar Jansen ◽  
Gerard Brekelmans ◽  
Hester Vermeulen ◽  
Catharina J van Oostveen

Abstract Purpose Research shows that the professional healthcare working environment influences the quality of care, safety climate, productivity, and motivation, happiness, and health of staff. The purpose of this systematic literature review was to assess instruments that provide valid, reliable and succinct measures of health care professionals’ work environment (WE) in hospitals. Data sources Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL EBSCOhost and Google Scholar were systematically searched from inception through December 2018. Study selection Pre-defined eligibility criteria (written in English, original work-environment instrument for healthcare professionals and not a translation, describing psychometric properties as construct validity and reliability) were used to detect studies describing instruments developed to measure the working environment. Data extraction After screening 6397 titles and abstracts, we included 37 papers. Two reviewers independently assessed the 37 instruments on content and psychometric quality following the COSMIN guideline. Results of data synthesis Our paper analysis revealed a diversity of items measured. The items were mapped into 48 elements on aspects of the healthcare professional’s WE. Quality assessment also revealed a wide range of methodological flaws in all studies. Conclusions We found a large variety of instruments that measure the professional healthcare environment. Analysis uncovered content diversity and diverse methodological flaws in available instruments. Two succinct, interprofessional instruments scored best on psychometrical quality and are promising for the measurement of the working environment in hospitals. However, further psychometric validation and an evaluation of their content is recommended.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document