Dataset Information

Developing an evidence assessment framework and appraising the academic literature on migrant health in Malaysia: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A large number of international migrants in Malaysia face challenges in obtaining good health, the extent of which is still relatively unknown. This study aims to map the existing academic literature on migrant health in Malaysia and to provide an overview of the topical coverage, quality and level of evidence of these scientific studies.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted using six databases, including Econlit, Embase, Global Health, Medline, PsycINFO and Social Policy and Practice. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were conducted in Malaysia, peer-reviewed, focused on a health dimension according to the Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative (BARHII) framework, and targeted the vulnerable international migrant population. Data were extracted by using the BARHII framework and a newly developed decision tree to identify the type of study design and corresponding level of evidence. Modified Joanna Briggs Institute checklists were used to assess study quality, and a multiple-correspondence analysis (MCA) was conducted to identify associations between different variables.

Results

67 publications met the selection criteria and were included in the study. The majority (n=41) of studies included foreign workers. Over two-thirds (n=46) focused on disease and injury, and a similar number (n=46) had descriptive designs. The average quality of the papers was low, yet quality differed significantly among them. The MCA showed that high-quality studies were mostly qualitative designs that included refugees and focused on living conditions, while prevalence and analytical cross-sectional studies were mostly of low quality.

Conclusion

This study provides an overview of the scientific literature on migrant health in Malaysia published between 1965 and 2019. In general, the quality of these studies is low, and various health dimensions have not been thoroughly researched. Therefore, researchers should address these issues to improve the evidence base to support policy-makers with high-quality evidence for decision-making.

SUBMITTER: de Smalen AW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7813391 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing an evidence assessment framework and appraising the academic literature on migrant health in Malaysia: a scoping review.

de Smalen Allard Willem AW Chan Zhie X ZX Abreu Lopes Claudia C Vanore Michaella M Loganathan Tharani T Pocock Nicola S NS

BMJ open 20210118 1

<h4>Background</h4>A large number of international migrants in Malaysia face challenges in obtaining good health, the extent of which is still relatively unknown. This study aims to map the existing academic literature on migrant health in Malaysia and to provide an overview of the topical coverage, quality and level of evidence of these scientific studies.<h4>Methods</h4>A scoping review was conducted using six databases, including Econlit, Embase, Global Health, Medline, PsycINFO and Social Po ...[more]

PMID: 33462099

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDisasters have an unequal impact on the population because of differences in conditions of vulnerability, exposure, and capacity. Migrants and women are among the groups that are at greater risk for and disproportionately affected by disasters. However, despite the large body of evidence that analyzes their vulnerability separately, disaster research that targets migrant women is scant. The aim of this scoping review was to analyze the published scientific literature concerning the vulnerability of migrant women and the consequent negative impact they experience during disasters.MethodsA literature search was conducted on December 15th, 2021 on Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. No time filter was applied to the search. Information regarding the article's main characteristics and design, migrant women and their migration experience, as well as about the type of disaster was collected. The factors responsible for the vulnerability of migrant women and the negative outcomes experienced during a disaster were extracted and inductively clustered in main themes reflecting several vulnerability pathways. The review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and relied on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).ResultsAfter full text review, 14 articles met the inclusion criteria. All of them adopted a qualitative methodology and focused on COVID-19. The pandemic negatively affected migrant women, by triggering numerous drivers that increased their level of exposure and vulnerability. Overall, six vulnerability factors have been identified: legal status, poverty conditions, pre-existing health conditions, limited agency, gender inequality and language and cultural barriers. These resulted in nine impacts: worsening of mental health status, poor access to care, worsening of physical health conditions, fraud, exacerbation of poverty, gender-based violence, jeopardization of educational path, and unfulfillment of their religious needs.ConclusionsThis review provided an analysis of the vulnerability factors of migrant women and the pathways leading to negative outcomes during a disaster. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that health equity is a goal that is still far to reach. The post-pandemic era should constitute the momentum for thoroughly addressing the social determinants of health that systematically marginalize the most vulnerable groups.

Project description:BackgroundClinical predictive tools quantify contributions of relevant patient characteristics to derive likelihood of diseases or predict clinical outcomes. When selecting predictive tools for implementation at clinical practice or for recommendation in clinical guidelines, clinicians are challenged with an overwhelming and ever-growing number of tools, most of which have never been implemented or assessed for comparative effectiveness. To overcome this challenge, we have developed a conceptual framework to Grade and Assess Predictive tools (GRASP) that can provide clinicians with a standardised, evidence-based system to support their search for and selection of efficient tools.MethodsA focused review of the literature was conducted to extract criteria along which tools should be evaluated. An initial framework was designed and applied to assess and grade five tools: LACE Index, Centor Score, Well's Criteria, Modified Early Warning Score, and Ottawa knee rule. After peer review, by six expert clinicians and healthcare researchers, the framework and the grading of the tools were updated.ResultsGRASP framework grades predictive tools based on published evidence across three dimensions: 1) Phase of evaluation; 2) Level of evidence; and 3) Direction of evidence. The final grade of a tool is based on the highest phase of evaluation, supported by the highest level of positive evidence, or mixed evidence that supports a positive conclusion. Ottawa knee rule had the highest grade since it has demonstrated positive post-implementation impact on healthcare. LACE Index had the lowest grade, having demonstrated only pre-implementation positive predictive performance.ConclusionGRASP framework builds on widely accepted concepts to provide standardised assessment and evidence-based grading of predictive tools. Unlike other methods, GRASP is based on the critical appraisal of published evidence reporting the tools' predictive performance before implementation, potential effect and usability during implementation, and their post-implementation impact. Implementing the GRASP framework as an online platform can enable clinicians and guideline developers to access standardised and structured reported evidence of existing predictive tools. However, keeping GRASP reports up-to-date would require updating tools' assessments and grades when new evidence becomes available, which can only be done efficiently by employing semi-automated methods for searching and processing the incoming information.

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/.

Project description:BackgroundPopulation aging is usually associated with increased health care needs. Developing an age-friendly health system with special features, structure, and functions to meet the special needs of older people and improving their health status and quality of life is essential. This study aimed to develop a conceptual framework for an age-friendly health system, which would offer a conceptual basis for providing the best possible care for older people in health system to let them experience a successful, healthy, and active aging.MethodsA scoping review was used to design the conceptual framework based on Arksey and O'Malley's model, including six stages, with the final stage of using expert's opinions to improve and validate the initial framework. The health system model of Van Olmen, was selected as the baseline model for this framework. Then, by reviewing the available evidence, the characteristics of an age-friendly health system were extracted and incorporated in the baseline mode.ResultsUsing the electronic searching, initially 12 316 documents were identified, of which 140 studies were selected and included in this review study. The relevant data were extracted from the 140 studies by two reviewers independently. Most studies were conducted in 2016-2020, and mostly were from United States (33.6%). To have an age-friendly health system, interventions and changes should be performed in functions, components and objectives of health systems. This system aims to provide evidence-based care through trained workforces and involves older people and their families in health policy-makings. Its consequences include better health acre for older people, with fewer healthcare-related harms, greater care satisfaction and increased use of cost-effective health services.ConclusionTo meet the needs of older people, health systems should make interventions in their functions for better performance. In line with these changes, other parts of society should work in harmony and set the health of older people as a top priority to ensure they can have a successful aging.

Dataset Information

Developing an evidence assessment framework and appraising the academic literature on migrant health in Malaysia: a scoping review.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Developing an evidence assessment framework and appraising the academic literature on migrant health in Malaysia: a scoping review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets