Dataset Information

Differences in health behaviours between immigrant and non-immigrant groups: a protocol for a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Health behaviours are important determinants of health and adoption of unhealthy behaviour is considered as one of the mechanisms through which immigrants' health changes over time in the host country. The change in health behaviours over time can contribute either to improving or worsening the overall health status of immigrants. Despite being the important mediators for the change in overall health status and chronic health conditions, no previous review (either general or systematic) has examined differences in key health behaviours simultaneously between immigrants and non-immigrants. This study aims to provide a systematic overview of the current global literature on differences in key health behaviours (that is, tobacco smoking, physical activity and alcohol drinking) between immigrant and non-immigrant groups.

Methods/design

Empirical studies in English language reporting quantitative data simultaneously on both immigrant and non-immigrant groups will be considered for this systematic review. Electronic scientific searches will be conducted on seven databases to identify relevant studies of interests: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Global Health, SocINDEX and ProQuest. In addition, Google/Google Scholar will be used to find the relevant studies and personal contact with experts will also be undertaken. Titles, abstracts and keywords of studies identified in the search strategies will be screened for inclusion criteria. The authors will select the studies following the PRISMA guidelines. The quality of included studies will be appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists. A descriptive summary statistics of included studies will describe the study designs, socio-demographic characteristics, and the exposure (immigrant and non-immigrant groups) and outcome (key health behaviours) measures. P-values and confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between exposure and key health behaviours will also be reported.

Discussion

This systematic review will facilitate a better understanding of differences in key health behaviours between immigrant and non-immigrant counterparts. It will provide a rigorous and reliable research base for future research and advance information on key health behaviours for a range of immigrant groups compared to non-immigrants in the high-migrant-receiving countries.

Systematic review registration

This systematic review protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42014008688).

SUBMITTER: Joshi S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4062644 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Differences in health behaviours between immigrant and non-immigrant groups: a protocol for a systematic review.

Joshi Suresh S Jatrana Santosh S Paradies Yin Y Priest Naomi N

Systematic reviews 20140610

<h4>Background</h4>Health behaviours are important determinants of health and adoption of unhealthy behaviour is considered as one of the mechanisms through which immigrants' health changes over time in the host country. The change in health behaviours over time can contribute either to improving or worsening the overall health status of immigrants. Despite being the important mediators for the change in overall health status and chronic health conditions, no previous review (either general or s ...[more]

PMID: 24915754

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImmigrant health professionals are a particularly vulnerable group in a host country's labour market, as they face several barriers when re-entering their occupations. International studies indicate that early interventions can increase the employability of immigrants. Qualification programmes are one of these early interventions that can support the re-integration of these health professionals into the labour market. The purpose of this review is to identify international qualification programmes for immigrant health professionals, analyse their content and evaluate their effectiveness.MethodsSix international databases (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsychInfo, EBSCO and ProQuest Social Sciences) were systematically searched. The search terms were identified using the PICOS-framework. The review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Articles were screened independently by two authors and discussed. Studies included in the final synthesis were assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and Kirkpatrick's Training Evaluation Model.ResultsOut of 10,371 findings, 31 articles were included in the final synthesis. The majority of them were addressed to international health care professionals and doctors. Two of them were addressed to refugee doctors. Three types of programme elements were identified: teaching, clinical practise and social support. The programmes' length ranged from 2 days to up to 2.5 years. Despite recommendations in its favour, pre- and post-programme support was scarce. Results also indicate a lack of transparency and quality in terms of evaluation. Effectiveness was mostly observed in the area of language improvement and an increase in self-confidence.ConclusionThis review points out the lack of systematically evaluated qualification programmes for immigrant health professionals. Programme providers should focus on implementing programmes for all health professionals as well as for underrepresented groups, such as refugees. In order to generate best practises it is necessary to evaluate these programmes. This requires the development of appropriate instruments when working with immigrant population in the context of educational programmes.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Maternal behaviours in pregnancy associated with adverse pregnancy, birth and health outcomes include tobacco smoking, poor nutrition, alcohol consumption and low physical activity, collectively referred to as the SNAP risk factors. Due to the high prevalence, co-occurrence and possible interactive health effects of such health behaviours in pregnancy, antenatal interventions that support pregnant women to improve multiple SNAP behaviours have a greater potential impact on the health outcomes of women and their children than interventions addressing single behaviours. The objective of this review is to determine the effectiveness of interventions delivered as part of antenatal care that aim to improve multiple SNAP behaviours among pregnant women. METHODS:Seven electronic databases will be searched for potentially eligible studies. Eligible studies will include those where pregnant women are attending antenatal care. Studies that examine the effect of an intervention that addresses multiple SNAP behaviours (??2 behaviours) during pregnancy and are delivered or instigated through antenatal care in a healthcare service will be included. Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), RCTs, cluster RCTs, stepped-wedge RCTs and non-randomised control trials will be eligible. Studies that include a no-intervention control, wait-list control group, standard/usual care, or another active single behavioural intervention (e.g. addressing one behaviour only) will be considered. Two independent reviewers will conduct study screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus or a third reviewer if required. A random effects model will be used to synthesise the results. Alternative synthesis methods will be investigated in instances where a meta-analysis is not appropriate, such as summarising effect estimates, combining P values, vote counting based on direction of effect, or synthesis in narrative form. DISCUSSION:The review will synthesise the evidence on the effect of interventions that address multiple SNAP behaviours in antenatal care and will help researchers, policy-makers and health services to develop and deliver best practice integrated models of antenatal care that have the potential to impact on both the short- and long-term health outcomes for women and their children. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42018095315.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a high prevalence of cardiovascular disease across diverse groups in the U.S. population, and increasing research has identified stigma as a potential barrier to cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment. This systematic review examines evidence linking discrimination and cardiovascular health among socially stigmatized groups.Study designSix databases were systematically reviewed from inception through February 2018 for studies with adult subjects, focusing on cardiovascular health indicators among social groups stigmatized because of their gender, race/ethnicity, age, body weight/obesity, or sexual orientation. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality and risk of bias for nonrandomized studies, and the Cochrane Collaboration 7-item domain for randomized controlled and experimental trials.ResultsThe search identified 84 eligible studies published between 1984 and 2017. Studies retrieved were categorized according to demonstrated links between stigma and cardiovascular disease risk factors including blood pressure (n = 45), heart rate variability (n = 6), blood/saliva cardiovascular biomarkers (n = 18), as well as other indicators of cardiovascular health (n = 15). Based on the findings from included studies, 86% concluded that there was a significant relationship among stigma or discrimination and cardiovascular health indicators among socially stigmatized groups. However, there were varying degrees of evidence supporting these relationships, depending on the type of discrimination and cardiovascular health indicator. The current evidence implies an association between perceived discrimination and cardiovascular health. However, a majority of these studies are cross-sectional (73%) and focus on racial discrimination (79%), while using a wide variety of measurements to assess social discrimination and cardiovascular health.ConclusionsFuture research should include longitudinal and randomized controlled trial designs, with larger and more diverse samples of individuals with stigmatized identities, using consistent measurement approaches to assess social discrimination and its relationship with cardiovascular health.

Dataset Information

Differences in health behaviours between immigrant and non-immigrant groups: a protocol for a systematic review.

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Systematic review registration

Publications

Differences in health behaviours between immigrant and non-immigrant groups: a protocol for a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets