Dataset Information

Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of South Asians to health research: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

People of South Asian ethnicity are under-represented in health research studies. The objectives of this scoping review were to examine the barriers and facilitators to recruitment of South Asians to health research studies and to describe strategies for improving recruitment.

Design

Scoping review METHODS: Using the Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping reviews, we comprehensively searched electronic databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycINFO). Studies that identified barriers and facilitators to recruitment, or recruitment strategies for South Asian populations were included. Recruitment barriers, facilitators and strategies were grouped thematically and summarised narratively.

Synthesis

Of 1846 potentially relevant articles, 15 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the thematic synthesis. Multiple facilitators and barriers to enrolment of South Asians in health research studies were identified; these most commonly related to logistical challenges, language and cultural barriers, concerns about adverse consequences of participating and mistrust of research. Several actionable strategies were discussed, the most common being engagement of South Asian communities, demonstration of cultural competency, provision of incentives and benefits, language sensitivity through the use of translators and translated materials and the development of trust and personal relationships.

Conclusion

There is a growing awareness of the barriers and facilitators to recruitment of South Asian participants to health research studies. Knowledge of effective recruitment strategies and implementation during the grant funding stages may reduce the risk of poor recruitment and representation of South Asians.

SUBMITTER: Quay TA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5541387 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of South Asians to health research: a scoping review.

Quay Teo Aw TA Frimer Leora L Janssen Patricia A PA Lamers Yvonne Y

BMJ open 20170601 5

<h4>Objectives</h4>People of South Asian ethnicity are under-represented in health research studies. The objectives of this scoping review were to examine the barriers and facilitators to recruitment of South Asians to health research studies and to describe strategies for improving recruitment.<h4>Design</h4>Scoping review METHODS: Using the Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping reviews, we comprehensively searched electronic databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycI ...[more]

PMID: 28576896

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCo-production is a collaborative approach to service user involvement in which users and researchers share power and responsibility in the research process. Although previous reviews have investigated co-production in mental health research, these do not typically focus on psychosis or severe mental health conditions. Meanwhile, people with psychosis may be under-represented in co-production efforts. This scoping review aims to explore the peer-reviewed literature to better understand the processes and terminology employed, as well as the barriers, facilitators, and outcomes of co-production in psychosis research.MethodsThree databases were searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO) using terms and headings related to psychosis and co-production. All titles, abstracts and full texts were independently double-screened. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Original research articles reporting on processes and methods of co-production involving adults with psychosis as well as barriers, facilitators, and/or outcomes of co-production were included. Data was extracted using a standardised template and synthesised narratively. Joanna Briggs Institute and the AGREE Reporting Checklist were used for quality assessment.ResultsThe search returned 1243 references. Fifteen studies were included: five qualitative, two cross-sectional, and eight descriptive studies. Most studies took place in the UK, and all reported user involvement in the research process; however, the amount and methods of involvement varied greatly. Although all studies were required to satisfy INVOLVE (2018) principles of co-production to be included, seven were missing several of the key features of co-production and often used different terms to describe their collaborative approaches. Commonly reported outcomes included improvements in mutual engagement as well as depth of understanding and exploration. Key barriers were power differentials between researchers and service users and stigma. Key facilitators were stakeholder buy-in and effective communication.ConclusionsThe methodology, terminology and quality of the studies varied considerably; meanwhile, over-representation of UK studies suggests there may be even more heterogeneity in the global literature not captured by our review. This study makes recommendations for encouraging co-production and improving the reporting of co-produced research, while also identifying several limitations that could be improved upon for a more comprehensive review of the literature.

Project description:IntroductionUnderrepresentation of disabled groups in clinical trials results in an inadequate evidence base for their clinical care, which drives health inequalities. This study aims to review and map the potential barriers and facilitators to the recruitment of disabled people in clinical trials to identify knowledge gaps and areas for further extensive research. The review addresses the question: 'What are the barriers and facilitators to recruitment of disabled people to clinical trials?'.MethodsThe Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Scoping review guidelines were followed to complete the current scoping review. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched via Ovid. The literature search was guided by a combination of four key concepts from the research question: (1) disabled populations, (2) patient recruitment, (3) barriers and facilitators, and (4) clinical trials. Papers discussing barriers and facilitators of all types were included. Papers that did not have at least one disabled group as their population were excluded. Data on study characteristics and identified barriers and facilitators were extracted. Identified barriers and facilitators were then synthesised according to common themes.ResultsThe review included 56 eligible papers. The evidence on barriers and facilitators was largely sourced from Short Communications from Researcher Perspectives (N = 22) and Primary Quantitative Research (N = 17). Carer perspectives were rarely represented in articles. The most common disability types for the population of interest in the literature were neurological and psychiatric disabilities. A total of five emergent themes were determined across the barriers and facilitators. These were as follows: risk vs benefit assessment, design and management of recruitment protocol, balancing internal and external validity considerations, consent and ethics, and systemic factors.ConclusionsBoth barriers and facilitators were often highly specific to disability type and context. Assumptions should be minimised, and study design should prioritise principles of co-design and be informed by a data-driven assessment of needs for the study population. Person-centred approaches to consent that empower disabled people to exercise their right to choose should be adopted in inclusive practice. Implementing these recommendations stands to improve inclusive practices in clinical trial research, serving to produce a well-rounded and comprehensive evidence base.

Project description:Background and aimHealth information technologies play a vital role in addressing diverse health needs among women, offering a wide array of services tailored to their specific requirements. Despite the potential benefits, the widespread utilization of these technologies by women faces numerous barriers and challenges. These barriers can cause women to either reduce their usage of health technologies or refrain from using them altogether. Therefore, this review was done with the aim of identifying and classifying barriers and facilitators.MethodsSome databases, including PubMed, Web of Sciences, and Scopus were searched using related keywords. Then, according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the articles were evaluated and selected. Finally, the barriers and facilitators were identified and classified.ResultsOut of 14,399 articles, finally 35 articles were included in the review. In general, 375 barriers (232 items) and facilitators (143 items) were extracted from the studies. After merging similar items, 121 barriers (51 items) and facilitators (70 items) identified were organized into five main themes (management, technological, legal and regulatory, personal, and data and information management). The most important barriers were "privacy, confidentiality, and security concerns" (n = 24), "deficiencies and limitations of infrastructure, software, hardware, and network" (n = 19), "sociocultural challenges" (n = 15), and "poor economic status" (n = 15). Moreover, the most important facilitators were "increasing awareness, skills and continuous education of women" (n = 17, in personal theme), "providing training services" (n = 14, in management theme), "simple, usable, and user-friendly design of technologies" (n = 14, in technological theme), and "providing financial or non-financial incentives (motivation) for women" (n = 14, in personal theme).ConclusionThis review showed that in order to use technologies, women face many barriers, either specific to women (such as gender inequality) or general (such as lack of technical skills). To overcome these barriers, policymakers, managers of organizations and medical centers, and designers of health systems can consider the facilitators identified in this review.

Project description:ObjectiveOver 850?000 people live with dementia in the UK. A proportion of these people are South Asians, who make up over 5% of the total UK population. Little is known about the prevalence, experience and treatment of dementia in the UK South Asian population. The aim of this scoping review is to identify dementia studies conducted in the UK South Asian population to highlight gaps in the literature which need to be addressed in future research.MethodDatabases were systematically searched using a comprehensive search strategy to identify studies. A methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was followed. An extraction form was developed to chart data and collate study characteristics and findings. Studies were then grouped into six categories: prevalence and characteristics; diagnosis validation and screening; knowledge, understanding and attitudes; help-seeking; experience of dementia; service organisation and delivery.ResultsA total of 6483 studies were identified, 27 studies were eligible for inclusion in the scoping review. We found that studies of prevalence, diagnosis and service organisation and delivery in UK South Asians are limited. We did not find any clinical trials of culturally appropriate interventions for South Asians with dementia in the UK. The existing evidence comes from small-scale service evaluations and case studies.ConclusionsThis is the first scoping review of the literature to identify priority areas for research to improve care for UK South Asians with dementia. Future research should first focus on developing and validating culturally appropriate diagnostic tools for the UK South Asians and then conducting high-quality epidemiological studies in order to accurately identify the prevalence of dementia in this group. The cultural adaptation of interventions for dementia and testing in randomised controlled trials is also vital to ensure that there are appropriate treatments available for the UK South Asians to access.

Dataset Information

Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of South Asians to health research: a scoping review.

Objectives

Design

Synthesis

Conclusion

Publications

Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of South Asians to health research: a scoping review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets