Dataset Information

Mortality of ethnic minority groups in the UK: a systematic review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Growing ethnic diversity in the UK has made it increasingly important to determine the presence of ethnic health inequalities. There has been no systematic review that has drawn together research on ethnic differences in mortality in the UK.

Methods

All types of observational studies that compare all-cause mortality between major ethnic groups and the white majority population in the UK will be included. We will search Medline (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), Scopus and Web of Science and search the grey literature through conference proceedings and online thesis registries. Searches will be carried out from inception to 2 August 2019 with no language or other restrictions. Database searches will be repeated prior to publication to identify new articles published since the initial search. We will conduct forward and backward citation tracking of identified references and consult with experts in the field to identify further publications and ongoing or unpublished studies. Two reviewers will independently screen studies and extract data. Two reviewers will independently assess the quality of included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. If at least two studies are located for each ethnic group and studies are sufficiently homogeneous, we will conduct a meta-analysis. If insufficient studies are located or if there is high heterogeneity we will produce a narrative summary of results.

Ethics and dissemination

As no primary data will be collected, formal ethical approval is not required. The findings of this review will be disseminated through publication in peer reviewed journals and conference presentations.

Prospero registration number

CRD42019146143.

SUBMITTER: Stanaway F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7322291 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mortality of ethnic minority groups in the UK: a systematic review protocol.

Stanaway Fiona F Noguchi Naomi N Mathieu Erin E Khalatbari-Soltani Saman S Bhopal Raj R

BMJ open 20200628 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>Growing ethnic diversity in the UK has made it increasingly important to determine the presence of ethnic health inequalities. There has been no systematic review that has drawn together research on ethnic differences in mortality in the UK.<h4>Methods</h4>All types of observational studies that compare all-cause mortality between major ethnic groups and the white majority population in the UK will be included. We will search Medline (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), Scopus and Web ...[more]

PMID: 32595151

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study evaluated the differences in clinical outcomes of COVID-19 infection between ethnic minorities and the White ethnic group in the UK.Study designSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsThis study included adult residents in the UK with confirmed COVID-19 infection. The outcomes evaluated in this study were mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Outcome data were compared between individuals from ethnic minority groups and individuals from a White ethnic background. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, medRxiv and PROSPERO were searched for articles published between May 2020 and April 2021. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale checklist.Prospero idCRD42021248117.ResultsFourteen studies (767,177 participants) were included in the current review. In the adjusted analysis, the pooled odds ratio (OR) for mortality following COVID-19 infection was higher for Black (OR 1.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-2.76, number of studies [k] = 6), Asian (OR 1.16, 95% CI: 0.85-1.57, k = 6) and Mixed and Other (MO) ethnic groups (OR 1.12, 95% CI: 1.04-1.20, k = 5) compared with the White ethnic group. The adjusted and unadjusted ORs of ICU admission for many of the ethnic minority groups were more than double the OR values for the White ethnic group (Black ethnic group = OR 2.32, 95% CI: 1.73-3.11, k = 5; Asian ethnic group = OR 2.34, 95% CI: 1.89-2.90, k = 5; and MO ethnic group = OR 2.26, 95% CI: 1.64-3.11, k = 4). In the adjusted analysis for IMV, the ORs were similarly significantly raised in ethnic minority groups compared with the White ethnic group (Black ethic group = OR 2.03, 95% CI: 1.80-2.29, k = 3; Asian ethnic group = OR 1.84, 95% CI: 1.20-2.80, k = 3; and MO ethnic group = OR 2.09, 95% CI: 1.35-3.22, k = 3).ConclusionThis review found that in the UK, Black, Asian and MO ethnic groups experienced increased COVID-19-related disease severity and mortality compared with the White ethnic group majority.

Project description:BackgroundCertain racial/ethnic minority groups have a higher risk of developing dementia, yet studies have demonstrated that they often have limited knowledge and understanding of this disease. An increasing number of educational and advocacy programs have been developed to promote dementia knowledge. We aimed at assessing current evidence and quality regarding educational interventions for promoting dementia knowledge.MethodsWe searched for intervention studies published in English that focused on educational interventions for promoting dementia knowledge among racial/ethnic minority groups. We identified 25 relevant studies through PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus, using tailored search terms. We screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full texts, synthesized relevant evidence, and evaluated the studies' quality based on the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Relevant intervention studies took place in communities, hospitals or clinics, and schools, and online.ResultsMost studies were conducted in the United States (n = 21), followed by the UK (n = 3). Over half of the studies included Asian/Pacific Islander groups (n = 14), followed by Black groups (n = 12) and Hispanic groups (n = 11). The intervention delivery mode varied across studies-from workshops hosted in a faith community to talk shows on YouTube. Target populations included middle-aged and older adults, caregivers and family members, health students and professionals, and elementary school students. Common content included symptoms and signs of dementia, protective and risk factors, and local resources. The assessment of study outcomes varied across studies. Improvement in dementia knowledge and attitudes towards dementia was reported in many studies. Among the included studies, intervention satisfaction was high. The overall quality of the interventions was low.ConclusionFormally evaluated educational interventions promoting dementia knowledge are at an early stage. Existing published interventions showed adequate acceptability and promise in promoting better understanding and awareness of dementia in minority groups. More well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed.

Project description:Background/objectivesWhile it is acknowledged that minority ethnic (ME) groups across international settings face barriers to accessing care for dementia, it is not clear whether ME groups access services less frequently as a result. The objective of this review is to examine whether ME groups have longer delays before accessing dementia/memory services, higher use of acute care and crisis services and lower use of routine care services based on existing literature. We also examined whether ME groups had higher dementia severity or lower cognition when presenting to memory services.DesignSystematic review with narrative synthesis.SettingNonresidential medical, psychiatric, memory, and emergency services.ParticipantsTwenty studies totaling 94,431 older adults with dementia or mild cognitive impairment.MeasurementsWe searched Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Global Health, and PsycINFO from inception to November 2018 for peer-reviewed observational studies which quantified ethnic minority differences in nonresidential health service use in people with dementia. Narrative synthesis was used to analyze findings.ResultsTwenty studies were included, mostly from the U.S. (n = 13), as well as the UK (n = 4), Australia (n = 1), Belgium (n = 1), and the Netherlands (n = 1). There was little evidence that ME groups in any country accessed routine care at different rates than comparison groups, although studies may have been underpowered. There was strong evidence that African American/Black groups had higher use of hospital inpatient services versus U.S. comparison groups. Primary care and emergency services were less well studied. Study quality was mixed, and there was a large amount of variability in the way ethnicity and service use outcomes were ascertained and defined.ConclusionThere is evidence that some ME groups, such as Black/African American groups in the U.S., may use more acute care services than comparison populations, but less evidence for differences in routine care use. Research is sparse, especially outside the U.S.

Project description:BackgroundAntibiotic resistance (ABR) is an urgent problem globally, with overuse and misuse of antibiotics being one of the main drivers of antibiotic-resistant infections. There is increasing evidence that the burden of community-acquired infections such as urinary tract infections and bloodstream infections (both susceptible and resistant) may differ by ethnicity, although the reasons behind this relationship are not well defined. It has been demonstrated that socioeconomic status and ethnicity are often highly correlated with each other; however, it is not yet known whether accounting for deprivation completely explains any discrepancy seen in infection risk. There have currently been no systematic reviews summarising the evidence for the relationship between ethnicity and antibiotic resistance or prescribing.MethodsThis protocol will outline how we will conduct this systematic literature review and meta-analysis investigating whether there is an association between patient ethnicity and (1) risk of antibiotic-resistant infections or (2) levels of antibiotic prescribing in high-income countries. We will search PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, Scopus and CINAHL using MESH terms where applicable. Two reviewers will conduct title/abstract screening, data extraction and quality assessment independently. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist will be used for cohort and case-control studies, and the Cochrane collaboration's risk of bias tool will be used for randomised control trials, if they are included. Meta-analyses will be performed by calculating the minority ethnic group to majority ethnic group odds ratios or risk ratios for each study and presenting an overall pooled odds ratio for the two outcomes. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the overall quality of the body of evidence.DiscussionIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we will aim to collate the available evidence of whether there is a difference in rates of AMR and/or antibiotic prescribing in minority vs. majority ethnic groups in high-income countries. Additionally, this review will highlight areas where more research needs to be conducted and may provide insight into what may cause differences in this relationship, should they be seen.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO ( CRD42016051533 ).

Project description:BackgroundGenetic testing for risk of hereditary cancer can help patients to make important decisions about prevention or early detection. US and UK studies show that people from ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive genetic testing. It is important to understand various groups' awareness of genetic testing and its acceptability to avoid further disparities in health care. This review aims to identify and detail awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic counselling/testing for cancer risk prediction in ethnic minority groups.MethodsA search was carried out in PsycInfo, CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE. Search terms referred to ethnicity, genetic testing/counselling, cancer, awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions. Quantitative and qualitative studies, written in English, and published between 2000 and 2015, were included.ResultsForty-one studies were selected for review: 39 from the US, and two from Australia. Results revealed low awareness and knowledge of genetic counselling/testing for cancer susceptibility amongst ethnic minority groups including African Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics. Attitudes towards genetic testing were generally positive; perceived benefits included positive implications for personal health and being able to inform family. However, negative attitudes were also evident, particularly the anticipated emotional impact of test results, and concerns about confidentiality, stigma, and discrimination. Chinese Australian groups were less studied, but of interest was a finding from qualitative research indicating that different views of who close family members are could impact on reported family history of cancer, which could in turn impact a risk assessment.ConclusionInterventions are needed to increase awareness and knowledge of genetic testing for cancer risk and to reduce the perceived stigma and taboo surrounding the topic of cancer in ethnic minority groups. More detailed research is needed in countries other than the US and across a broader spectrum of ethnic minority groups to develop effective culturally sensitive approaches for cancer prevention.

Project description:The racial and ethnic disparities in diet-related chronic diseases are major concerns. This systematic review examines the extent to which diet-induced changes in health outcomes, such as cardiometabolic, inflammation, cancer, bone health, and kidney function outcomes, etc., have been reported and discussed by race or ethnicity in randomized trials with 2 or more diet arms that recruited both minority and non-Hispanic White groups. Databases (i.e., PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched up to August 2021. Thirty-four studies that discussed effects of defined dietary interventions on health outcomes by racial or ethnic minority group compared with non-Hispanic Whites were included in the systematic review (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021229256). Acute trials and those with 1 diet arm that accounted for race or ethnicity in their analyses and studies that focused on a single racial or ethnic group were discussed separately. Most studies were conducted in Black compared with White adults testing effects of energy restriction, macronutrient modification, sodium reduction, or variations of the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet on cardiometabolic outcomes. There was limited focus on other minority groups. Evidence suggests greater blood pressure reduction for Black adults compared with Whites particularly with DASH (or similar) diets. Overall, there was limited consideration for group-specific eating patterns and diet acceptability. Overall risk of bias was low. With emerging precision nutrition initiatives that aim to optimize metabolic responses in population subgroups through tailored approaches, it is imperative to ensure adequate representation of racial and ethnic subgroups for addressing health disparities. Factors that help explain variability in responses such as socioecological context should be included and adequately powered. Given the racial and ethnic disparities in chronic diseases, studying the adoption, maintenance, and effectiveness of dietary interventions on health outcomes among different groups is critical for developing approaches that can mitigate diet-related health disparities.

Dataset Information

Mortality of ethnic minority groups in the UK: a systematic review protocol.

Introduction

Methods

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Mortality of ethnic minority groups in the UK: a systematic review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets