Dataset Information

The health of adolescents in detention: a global scoping review.

ABSTRACT: Adolescents detained within the criminal justice system are affected by complex health problems, health-risk behaviours, and high rates of premature death. We did a global synthesis of the evidence regarding the health of this population. We searched Embase, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, PubMed, Web of Science, CINCH, Global Health, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Campbell Library, the National Criminal Justice Reference System Abstract Database, and Google Scholar for peer-reviewed journal articles, including reviews, that reported the prevalence of at least one health outcome (physical, mental, sexual, infectious, and neurocognitive) in adolescents (aged <20 years) in detention, and were published between Jan 1, 1980, and June 30, 2018. The reference lists of published review articles were scrutinised for additional relevant publications. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, and three reviewed full texts of relevant articles. The protocol for this Review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016041392). 245 articles (204 primary research articles and 41 reviews) were included, with most primary research (183 [90%]) done in high-income countries. A high lifetime prevalence of health problems, risks, and conditions was reported in detained adolescents, including mental disorders (0-95%), substance use disorders (22-96%), self-harm (12-65%), neurodevelopmental disabilities (2-47%), infectious diseases (0-34%), and sexual and reproductive conditions (pregnant by age 19 years 20-37%; abnormal cervical screening test result 16%). Various physical and mental health problems and health-risk behaviours are more common among adolescents in detention than among their peers who have not been detained. As the social and structural drivers of poor health overlap somewhat with factors associated with exposure to the criminal justice system, strategies to address these factors could help to reduce both rates of adolescent detention and adolescent health inequalities. Improving the detection of mental and physical disorders, providing appropriate interventions during detention, and optimising transitional health care after release from detention could improve the health outcomes of these vulnerable young people.

SUBMITTER: Borschmann R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7025881 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The health of adolescents in detention: a global scoping review.

Borschmann Rohan R Janca Emilia E Carter Annie A Willoughby Melissa M Hughes Nathan N Snow Kathryn K Stockings Emily E Hill Nicole T M NTM Hocking Jane J Love Alexander A Patton George C GC Sawyer Susan M SM Fazel Seena S Puljević Cheneal C Robinson Jo J Kinner Stuart A SA

The Lancet. Public health 20200116 2

Adolescents detained within the criminal justice system are affected by complex health problems, health-risk behaviours, and high rates of premature death. We did a global synthesis of the evidence regarding the health of this population. We searched Embase, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, PubMed, Web of Science, CINCH, Global Health, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Campbell Library, the National Criminal Justice Reference System Abstract Database, and Google S ...[more]

PMID: 31954434

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Space technology has an impact on many domains of activity on earth, including in the field of global health. With the recent adoption of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals that highlight the need for strengthening partnerships in different domains, it is useful to better characterize the relationship between space technology and global health. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to identify the applications of space technologies to global health, the key stakeholders in the field, as well as gaps and challenges. METHODS:We used a scoping review methodology, including a literature review and the involvement of stakeholders, via a brief self-administered, open-response questionnaire. A distinct search on several search engines was conducted for each of the four key technological domains that were previously identified by the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs' Expert Group on Space and Global Health (Domain A: remote sensing; Domain B: global navigation satellite systems; Domain C: satellite communication; and Domain D: human space flight). Themes in which space technologies are of benefit to global health were extracted. Key stakeholders, as well as gaps, challenges, and perspectives were identified. RESULTS:A total of 222 sources were included for Domain A, 82 sources for Domain B, 144 sources for Domain C, and 31 sources for Domain D. A total of 3 questionnaires out of 16 sent were answered. Global navigation satellite systems and geographic information systems are used for the study and forecasting of communicable and noncommunicable diseases; satellite communication and global navigation satellite systems for disaster response; satellite communication for telemedicine and tele-education; and global navigation satellite systems for autonomy improvement, access to health care, as well as for safe and efficient transportation. Various health research and technologies developed for inhabited space flights have been adapted for terrestrial use. CONCLUSIONS:Although numerous examples of space technology applications to global health exist, improved awareness, training, and collaboration of the research community is needed.

Project description:BackgroundSince the 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola epidemic, the concept of measuring health security capacity has become increasingly important within the broader context of health systems-strengthening, enhancing responses to public health emergencies, and reducing global catastrophic biological risks. Efforts to regularly and sustainably track the evolution of health security capabilities and capacities over time - while also accounting for political, social, and environmental risks - could help countries progress toward eliminating sources of health insecurity. We sought to aggregate evidence-based principles that capture a country's baseline public health and healthcare capabilities, its health security system performance before and during infectious disease crises, and its broader social, political, security, and ecological risk environments.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of English-language scholarly and gray literature to identify evidence- and practice-based indicators and proxies for measuring health security at the country level over time. We then used a qualitative coding framework to identify recurrent themes in the literature and synthesize foundational principles for measuring global health security. Documents reviewed included English-language literature published after 2001 until the end of the research period-September 2017-to ensure relevance to the current global health security landscape; literature examining acute infectious disease threats with potential for transnational spread; and literature addressing global health security efforts at the country level.ResultsWe synthesized four foundational principles for measuring global health security: measurement requires assessment of existing capacities, as well as efforts to build core public health, healthcare, and biosecurity capabilities; assessments of national programs and efforts to mitigate a critical subset of priority threats could inform efforts to generate useful metrics for global health security; there are measurable enabling factors facilitating health security-strengthening efforts; and finally, measurement requires consideration of social, political, and ecological risk environments.ConclusionThe themes identified in this review could inform efforts to systematically assess the impacts and effectiveness of activities undertaken to strengthen global health security.

Project description:The emergence of global health partnerships (GHPs) towards the end of the twentieth century reflected concerns about slow progress in access to essential medicines, including vaccines. These partnerships bring together governments, private philanthropic foundations, NGOs, and international agencies. Those in the vaccine field seek to incentivise the development and manufacture of new vaccines, raise funds to pay for them and develop and support systems to deliver them to those in need. These activities became more critical during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the COVAX Facility Initiative promoting global vaccine equity. This review identifies lessons from previous experiences with GHPs. Findings contribute to understanding the emergence of GHPs, the mechanisms they leverage to support global access to vaccines, and the inherent challenges associated with their implementation. Using Arksey and O'Malley's method, we conducted a scoping review to identify and synthesise relevant articles. We analysed data thematically to identify barriers and opportunities for success. We included 68 eligible articles of 3,215 screened. Most (65 [95%]) were discussion or review articles describing partnerships or programmes they supported, and three (5%) were commentaries. Emerging themes included policy responses (e.g., immunisation mandates), different forms of partnerships arising in vaccine innovation (e.g., product development partnerships, public-private partnerships for access), and influence on global governance decision-making processes (e.g., the rising influence of foundations, diminishing authority of WHO, lack of accountability and transparency, creation of disease silos). If global health partnerships are to maximise their contributions, they should: (1) increase transparency, especially regarding their impacts; (2) address the need for health systems strengthening; and (3) address disincentives for cooperative vaccine research and development partnerships and encourage expansion of manufacturing capacity in low and middle-income countries.

Project description:ObjectivesTo chart the global literature on gender equity in academic health research.DesignScoping review.ParticipantsQuantitative studies were eligible if they examined gender equity within academic institutions including health researchers.Primary and secondary outcome measuresOutcomes related to equity across gender and other social identities in academia: (1) faculty workforce: representation of all genders in university/faculty departments, academic rank or position and salary; (2) service: teaching obligations and administrative/non-teaching activities; (3) recruitment and hiring data: number of applicants by gender, interviews and new hires for various rank; (4) promotion: opportunities for promotion and time to progress through academic ranks; (5) academic leadership: type of leadership positions, opportunities for leadership promotion or training, opportunities to supervise/mentor and support for leadership bids; (6) scholarly output or productivity: number/type of publications and presentations, position of authorship, number/value of grants or awards and intellectual property ownership; (7) contextual factors of universities; (8) infrastructure; (9) knowledge and technology translation activities; (10) availability of maternity/paternity/parental/family leave; (11) collaboration activities/opportunities for collaboration; (12) qualitative considerations: perceptions around promotion, finances and support.ResultsLiterature search yielded 94 798 citations; 4753 full-text articles were screened, and 562 studies were included. Most studies originated from North America (462/562, 82.2%). Few studies (27/562, 4.8%) reported race and fewer reported sex/gender (which were used interchangeably in most studies) other than male/female (11/562, 2.0%). Only one study provided data on religion. No other PROGRESS-PLUS variables were reported. A total of 2996 outcomes were reported, with most studies examining academic output (371/562, 66.0%).ConclusionsReviewed literature suggest a lack in analytic approaches that consider genders beyond the binary categories of man and woman, additional social identities (race, religion, social capital and disability) and an intersectionality lens examining the interconnection of multiple social identities in understanding discrimination and disadvantage. All of these are necessary to tailor strategies that promote gender equity.Trial registration numberOpen Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/.

Dataset Information

The health of adolescents in detention: a global scoping review.

Publications

The health of adolescents in detention: a global scoping review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets