1
|
Bangpan M, Felix L, Soliman F, D’Souza P, Jieman AT, Dickson K. The impact of mental health and psychosocial support programmes on children and young people's mental health in the context of humanitarian emergencies in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob Ment Health (Camb) 2024; 11:e21. [PMID: 38572260 PMCID: PMC10988149 DOI: 10.1017/gmh.2024.17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2023] [Revised: 12/20/2023] [Accepted: 01/30/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Humanitarian emergencies pose a significant global health challenge for children and young people's mental and psychological health. This systematic review investigates the effectiveness of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programmes delivered to children and young people affected by humanitarian emergencies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Twelve electronic databases, key websites and citation checking were undertaken. Forty-three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English between January 1980 and May 2023 were included in the review. Overall, the findings suggest that cognitive behavioural therapy may improve depression symptoms in children and young people affected by humanitarian emergencies. Narrative exposure therapy may reduce feelings of guilt. However, the impact of the other MHPSS modalities across outcomes is inconsistent. In some contexts, providing psychosocial programmes involving creative activities may increase the symptoms of depression in children and young people. These findings emphasise the need for the development of MHPSS programmes that can safely and effectively address the diverse needs of children and young people living in adversarial environments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mukdarut Bangpan
- The Evidence for Policy and Practice information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Lambert Felix
- School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, United Kingdom
| | - Farida Soliman
- Linguistics Department, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Preethy D’Souza
- The Evidence for Policy and Practice information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Anna-Theresa Jieman
- Department of Biological and Experimental Psychology, School of Biological and Behavioural Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Kelly Dickson
- The Evidence for Policy and Practice information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Oliver S, Dickson K, Bangpan M. Academic contributions to the development of evidence and policy systems: an EPPI Centre collective autoethnography. Health Res Policy Syst 2023; 21:110. [PMID: 37880785 PMCID: PMC10601151 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-023-01051-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2023] [Accepted: 09/11/2023] [Indexed: 10/27/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evidence for policy systems emerging around the world combine the fields of research synthesis, evidence-informed policy and public engagement with research. We conducted this retrospective collective autoethnography to understand the role of academics in developing such systems. METHODS We constructed a timeline of EPPI Centre work and associated events since 1990. We employed: Transition Theory to reveal emerging and influential innovations; and Transformative Social Innovation theory to track their increasing depth, reach and embeddedness in research and policy organisations. FINDINGS The EPPI Centre, alongside other small research units, collaborated with national and international organisations at the research-policy interface to incubate, spread and embed new ways of working with evidence and policy. Sustainable change arising from research-policy interactions was less about uptake and embedding of innovations, but more about co-developing and tailoring innovations with organisations to suit their missions and structures for creating new knowledge or using knowledge for decisions. Both spreading and embedding innovation relied on mutual learning that both accommodated and challenged established assumptions and values of collaborating organisations as they adapted to closer ways of working. The incubation, spread and embedding of innovations have been iterative, with new ways of working inspiring further innovation as they spread and embedded. Institutionalising evidence for policy required change in both institutions generating evidence and institutions developing policy. CONCLUSIONS Key mechanisms for academic contributions to advancing evidence for policy were: contract research focusing attention at the research-policy interface; a willingness to work in unfamiliar fields; inclusive ways of working to move from conflict to consensus; and incentives and opportunities for reflection and consolidating learning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandy Oliver
- Social Research Institute, University College London, 10 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NR, United Kingdom.
| | - Kelly Dickson
- Social Research Institute, University College London, 10 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NR, United Kingdom
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- Social Research Institute, University College London, 10 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NR, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mathias EG, Anupama DS, Phagdol T, Nayak BS, Nagaraja R, Dickson K, Bangpan M, Lakshmanan G, D’Souza P. Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health Among Healthcare Workers in India: A Mixed-methods Systematic Review. Oman Med J 2023; 38:e544. [PMID: 38225995 PMCID: PMC10788929 DOI: 10.5001/omj.2023.111] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2023] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 01/17/2024] Open
Abstract
Healthcare workers (HCWs) experienced significant mental health challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review aimed to comprehensively assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of HCWs in India. We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review, which adopts a results-based convergent approach that incorporates quantitative and qualitative data. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in relevant databases: PubMed-Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ProQuest. All available full-text studies in the English language that assessed the mental health outcomes (anxiety, stress, and depression) of HCWs during the pandemic and published until 28 February 2022 were included. A total of 31 studies were included in this review (27 quantitative studies, three qualitative studies, and one mixed-method study). The pooled prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress among HCWs in India was 32.96%, 29.49%, and 33.47%, respectively. Integration of quantitative and qualitative findings using social determinants of health framework resulted in various contributing factors and coping strategies. There is a need for a supportive work environment, mental health support, and mental health policies for HCWs in India.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edlin Glane Mathias
- Department of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India
| | - D. S. Anupama
- Department of Global Health Governance, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India
| | - Tenzin Phagdol
- Department of Child Health Nursing, Manipal College of Nursing, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India
| | - Baby S. Nayak
- Department of Child Health Nursing, Manipal College of Nursing, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India
| | - Ravishankar Nagaraja
- Department of Biostatistics, Vallabhai Patel Chest Institute, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India
| | - Kelly Dickson
- Social Research Institute, Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- Social Research Institute, Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK
| | - Gopichandran Lakshmanan
- Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, College of Nursing, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Preethy D’Souza
- Social Research Institute, Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hong QN, Bangpan M, Stansfield C, Kneale D, O'Mara-Eves A, van Grootel L, Thomas J. Using systems perspectives in evidence synthesis: A methodological mapping review. Res Synth Methods 2022; 13:667-680. [PMID: 35932206 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1595] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2021] [Revised: 07/15/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
Reviewing complex interventions is challenging because they include many elements that can interact dynamically in a nonlinear manner. A systems perspective offers a way of thinking to help understand complex issues, but its application in evidence synthesis is not established. The aim of this project was to understand how and why systems perspectives have been applied in evidence synthesis. A methodological mapping review was conducted to identify papers using a systems perspective in evidence synthesis. A search was conducted in seven bibliographic databases and three search engines. A total of 101 papers (representing 98 reviews) met the eligibility criteria. Two categories of reviews were identified: (1) reviews using a "systems lens" to frame the topic, generate hypotheses, select studies, and guide the analysis and interpretation of findings (n = 76) and (2) reviews using systems methods to develop a systems model (n = 22). Several methods (e.g., systems dynamic modeling, soft systems approach) were identified, and they were used to identify, rank and select elements, analyze interactions, develop models, and forecast needs. The main reasons for using a systems perspective were to address complexity, view the problem as a whole, and understand the interrelationships between the elements. Several challenges for capturing the true nature and complexity of a problem were raised when performing these methods. This review is a useful starting point when designing evidence synthesis of complex interventions. It identifies different opportunities for applying a systems perspective in evidence synthesis, and highlights both commonplace and less familiar methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Quan Nha Hong
- EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| | - Claire Stansfield
- EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| | - Dylan Kneale
- EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| | - Alison O'Mara-Eves
- EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - James Thomas
- EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Intarates M, Dhippayom T, Upakdee N, Leesmidt V, Weraphong J, Bangpan M. How area health management leads to improved equity in health: a scoping review. Journal of Health Research 2022. [DOI: 10.56808/2586-940x.1010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
|
6
|
Chhibber A, Kharat A, Kneale D, Welch V, Bangpan M, Chaiyakunapruk N. Assessment of health equity consideration in masking/PPE policies to contain COVID-19 using PROGRESS-plus framework: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2021; 21:1682. [PMID: 34525995 PMCID: PMC8443429 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-11688-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2021] [Accepted: 08/29/2021] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There is increasing evidence that COVID-19 has unmasked the true magnitude of health inequity worldwide. Policies and guidance for containing the infection and reducing the COVID-19 related deaths have proven to be effective, however the extent to which health inequity factors were considered in these policies is rather unknown. The aim of this study is to measure the extent to which COVID-19 related policies reflect equity considerations by focusing on the global policy landscape around wearing masks and personal protection equipment (PPE). METHODS A systematic search for published documents on COVID-19 and masks/PPE was conducted across six databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, ASSIA and Psycinfo. Reviews, policy documents, briefs related to COVID-19 and masks/PPE were included in the review. To assess the extent of incorporation of equity in the policy documents, a guidance framework known as 'PROGRESS-Plus': Place of residence, Race/ethnicity, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital, Plus (age, disability etc.) was utilized. RESULTS This review included 212 policy documents. Out of 212 policy documents, 190 policy documents (89.62%) included at least one PROGRESS-plus component. Most of the policy documents (n = 163, 85.79%) focused on "occupation" component of the PROGRESS-plus followed by personal characteristics associated with discrimination (n = 4;2.11%), place of residence (n = 2;1.05%) and education (n = 1;0.53%). Subgroup analysis revealed that most of the policy documents (n = 176, 83.01%) were focused on "workers" such as healthcare workers, mortuary workers, school workers, transportation workers, essential workers etc. Of the remaining policy documents, most were targeted towards whole population (n = 30; 14.15%). Contrary to "worker focused" policy documents, most of the 'whole population focused' policy documents didn't have a PROGRESS-plus equity component rendering them equity limiting for the society. CONCLUSION Our review highlights even if policies considered health inequity during the design/implementation, this consideration was often one dimensional in nature. In addition, population wide policies should be carefully designed and implemented after identifying relevant equity related barriers in order to produce better outcomes for the whole society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Aditi Kharat
- School of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Dylan Kneale
- The Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| | - Vivian Welch
- Bruyere Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- The Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
| | - Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk
- School of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
- School of Pharmacy, Monash University, Subang Jaya, Malaysia.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Barua P, Bangpan M, Narattharaksa K, Suphanchaimat R, Chaiyakunapruk N. Healthcare Policies for Stateless Populations in ASEAN Countries: A Scoping Review. J Immigr Minor Health 2019; 22:597-620. [PMID: 31741181 DOI: 10.1007/s10903-019-00945-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
This study aimed at summarizing the existing health policies for stateless populations living in the 10 ASEAN countries: Brunei, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. We followed scoping review method recommended by Arksey and O'Malley. Our inclusion criteria were based on three concepts: populations (stateless and undocumented people), issues (healthcare policies and regulations), and settings (10 ASEAN countries). Our findings suggest that none of the ASEAN countries have explicit healthcare policies for stateless people except Thailand. We also observed that ratification of international human rights treaties relating to the right to health does not necessarily translate into the provision of healthcare policies for stateless population. Although Thailand seems like the only country among 10 ASIAN countries having health policies for stateless populations in the country, the question remains whether having a policy would lead to a proper implementation by ensuring right to health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Proloy Barua
- Health Systems Management, Graduate School, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, 65000, Thailand
- Independent Evaluation and Research Cell (IERC), BRAC International, 75 Mohakhali, Dhaka, 1212, Bangladesh
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), Department of Social Science, UCL Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL, UK
| | - Kanida Narattharaksa
- Health Systems Management, Graduate School, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, 65000, Thailand
- Faculty of Medical Science, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, 65000, Thailand
| | - Rapeepong Suphanchaimat
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Disease Control, Ministry of Public Health, Tiwanon Road, Nonthaburi, 11000, Thailand
- International Health Policy Program (IHPP), Ministry of Public Health, Tiwanon Road, Nonthaburi, 11000, Thailand
| | - Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk
- Department of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bangpan M, Felix L, Dickson K. Mental health and psychosocial support programmes for adults in humanitarian emergencies: a systematic review and meta-analysis in low and middle-income countries. BMJ Glob Health 2019; 4:e001484. [PMID: 31646006 PMCID: PMC6782047 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001484] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2019] [Revised: 06/14/2019] [Accepted: 06/15/2019] [Indexed: 12/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Humanitarian emergencies are a major global health challenge with the potential to have a profound impact on people’s mental and psychological health. Effective interventions in humanitarian settings are needed to support the mental health and psychosocial needs of affected populations. To fill this gap, this systematic review synthesises evidence on the effectiveness of a wide range of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programmes delivered to adults affected by humanitarian emergencies in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods A comprehensive search of 12 electronic databases, key websites and citation checking was undertaken in 2015 and updated in May 2018. We included controlled trials published in English from 1980. We extracted data and assessed risk of bias prior to performing a meta-analysis using random effects models. When meta-analysis was not used, we narratively described individual trial effect sizes using forest plots. Results Thirty-five studies were included. Overall, MHPSS programmes show benefits in improved functioning and reducing post-traumatic stress disorder. There are also indications from a limited pool of evidence that cognitive–behavioural therapy and narrative exposure therapy may improve mental health conditions. Other psychotherapy modalities also showed a positive trend in favour of MHPSS programmes for improving several mental health outcomes. Conclusion In addition to MHPSS programme for improving mental health outcomes in adults affected by humanitarian emergencies in LMICs, there is also a need to generate robust evidence to identify potential impact on broader social dimensions. Doing so could aid the future development of MHPSS programmes and ensure their effective implementation across different humanitarian contexts in LMICs. Future research on MHPSS programmes which focus on basic services and security, community and family programmes, their cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of impact could also strengthen the MHPSS evidence base to better inform policy and practice decision-making in humanitarian settings. Protocol registration number CRD42016033578.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mukdarut Bangpan
- The Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinatng Centre (EPPI-Centre), Department of Social Science, University College London Institute of Education, London, UK
| | - Lambert Felix
- School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Kelly Dickson
- The Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinatng Centre (EPPI-Centre), Department of Social Science, University College London Institute of Education, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Yadee J, Bangpan M, Thavorn K, Welch V, Tugwell P, Chaiyakunapruk N. Assessing evidence of interventions addressing inequity among migrant populations: a two-stage systematic review. Int J Equity Health 2019; 18:64. [PMID: 31060570 PMCID: PMC6501336 DOI: 10.1186/s12939-019-0970-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2018] [Accepted: 04/22/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Everyone has the right to achieve the standard of health and well-being. Migrants are considered as vulnerable populations due to the lack of access to health services and financial protection in health. Several interventions have been developed to improve migrant population health, but little is known about whether these interventions have considered the issue of equity as part of their outcome measurement. OBJECTIVE To assess the evidence of health interventions in addressing inequity among migrants. METHODS We adopted a two-stage searching approach to ensure the feasibility of this review. First, reviews of interventions for migrants were searched from five databases: PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and EMBASE until June 2017. Second, full articles included in the identified reviews were retrieved. Primary studies included in the identified reviews were then evaluated as to whether they met the following criteria: experimental studies which include equity aspects as part of their outcome measurement, based on equity attributes defined by PROGRESS-Plus factors (place of residence, race/ethnicity, occupation, gender, religion, education, socio-economic status, social capital, and others). We analysed the information extracted from the selected articles based on the PRISMA-Equity guidelines and the PROGRESS-Plus factors. RESULTS Forty-nine reviews involving 1145 primary studies met the first-stage inclusion criteria. After exclusion of 764 studies, the remaining 381 experimental studies were assessed. Thirteen out of 381 experimental studies (3.41%) were found to include equity attributes as part of their outcome measurement. However, although some associations were found none of the included studies demonstrated the effect of the intervention on reducing inequity. All studies were conducted in high-income countries. The interventions included individual directed, community education and peer navigator-related interventions. CONCLUSIONS Current evidence reveals that there is a paucity of studies assessing equity attributes of health interventions developed for migrant populations. This indicates that equity has not been receiving attention in these studies of migrant populations. More attention to equity-focused outcome assessment is needed to help policy-makers to consider all relevant outcomes for sound decision making concerning migrants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jirawit Yadee
- Department of Pharmaceutical Care, Faculty of Pharmacy, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), UCL Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK
| | - Kednapa Thavorn
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- Institute of Clinical and Evaluative Sciences, ICES uOttawa, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
| | - Vivian Welch
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
| | - Peter Tugwell
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Knowledge Translation and Health Technology Assessment in Health Equity, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
| | - Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk
- School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, 46150 Bandar Sunway, Selangor Malaysia
- Center of Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research (CPOR), Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, Thailand
- School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA
- Asian Centre for Evidence Synthesis in Population, Implementation and Clinical Outcomes (PICO), Health and Well-being Cluster, Global Asia in the 21st Century (GA21) Platform, Monash University Malaysia, Bandar Sunway, Selangor Malaysia
- Department of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Teoh SL, Ngorsuraches S, Lai NM, Bangpan M, Chaiyakunapruk N. Factors affecting consumers' decisions on the use of nutraceuticals: a systematic review. Int J Food Sci Nutr 2019; 70:491-512. [PMID: 30634867 DOI: 10.1080/09637486.2018.1538326] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
There is a high and increasing global prevalence of nutraceuticals use. This study aims to systematically review and critically appraise all available evidence to identify the factors affecting consumers' decisions in taking nutraceuticals. Questionnaire, interview or focus group studies which directly reported factors affecting consumers' decisions in using nutraceuticals were included. A thematic synthesis method was employed to synthesis the findings from the included studies. Out of the 76 studies included, the key factors identified as the most important factors motivating consumers to take nutraceuticals were the perceived health benefits and safety of nutraceuticals, as well as the advice from healthcare professionals, friends and family. The identified barriers to take nutraceuticals were a lack of belief in the health benefit of nutraceuticals, the high cost of nutraceuticals and consumers' lack of knowledge about nutraceuticals. As a chief course of recommendation for the use of nutraceuticals, healthcare professionals should strive to utilise reliable information from clinical evidence to help consumers in making an informed decision in using nutraceuticals. Future studies should explore the possible ways to improve channelling clinical evidence information of nutraceuticals to the public.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siew Li Teoh
- a School of Pharmacy , Monash University Malaysia , Selangor , Malaysia
| | - Surachat Ngorsuraches
- b Department of Health Outcomes Research and Policy, Harrison School of Pharmacy , Auburn University , Auburn , AL , USA
| | - Nai Ming Lai
- c School of Medicine , Taylor's University Malaysia , Selangor , Malaysia.,d Asian Centre for Evidence Synthesis in Population, Implementation and Clinical Outcomes (PICO), Health and Well-being Cluster, Global Asia Platform in the 21st Century (GA21) Platform , Monash University Malaysia , Bandar Sunway , Selangor , Malaysia
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- e Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), Social Science Research Unit, Department of Social Science, UCL Institute of Education , University College London , London , UK
| | - Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk
- a School of Pharmacy , Monash University Malaysia , Selangor , Malaysia.,d Asian Centre for Evidence Synthesis in Population, Implementation and Clinical Outcomes (PICO), Health and Well-being Cluster, Global Asia Platform in the 21st Century (GA21) Platform , Monash University Malaysia , Bandar Sunway , Selangor , Malaysia.,f Center of Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research (CPOR), Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences , Naresuan University , Phitsanulok , Thailand.,g School of Pharmacy , University of Wisconsin , Madison , WI , USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Stansfield C, Dickson K, Bangpan M. Exploring issues in the conduct of website searching and other online sources for systematic reviews: how can we be systematic? Syst Rev 2016; 5:191. [PMID: 27846867 PMCID: PMC5111285 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0371-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2016] [Accepted: 11/01/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Websites and online resources outside academic bibliographic databases can be significant sources for identifying literature, though there are challenges in searching and managing the results. These are pertinent to systematic reviews that are underpinned by principles of transparency, accountability and reproducibility. We consider how the conduct of searching these resources can be compatible with the principles of a systematic search. We present an approach to address some of the challenges. This is particularly relevant when websites are relied upon to identify important literature for a review. We recommend considering the process as three stages and having a considered rationale and sufficient recordkeeping at each stage that balances transparency with practicality of purpose. Advances in technology and recommendations for website providers are briefly discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Stansfield
- Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating (EPPI)-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London, 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NR UK
| | - Kelly Dickson
- Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating (EPPI)-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London, 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NR UK
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating (EPPI)-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London, 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NR UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sutcliffe K, Thomas J, Stokes G, Hinds K, Bangpan M. Intervention Component Analysis (ICA): a pragmatic approach for identifying the critical features of complex interventions. Syst Rev 2015; 4:140. [PMID: 26514644 PMCID: PMC4627414 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-015-0126-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2015] [Accepted: 09/30/2015] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In order to enable replication of effective complex interventions, systematic reviews need to provide evidence about their critical features and clear procedural details for their implementation. Currently, few systematic reviews provide sufficient guidance of this sort. METHODS Through a worked example, this paper reports on a methodological approach, Intervention Component Analysis (ICA), specifically developed to bridge the gap between evidence of effectiveness and practical implementation of interventions. By (a) using an inductive approach to explore the nature of intervention features and (b) making use of trialists' informally reported experience-based evidence, the approach is designed to overcome the deficiencies of poor reporting which often hinders knowledge translation work whilst also avoiding the need to invest significant amounts of time and resources in following up details with authors. RESULTS A key strength of the approach is its ability to reveal hidden or overlooked intervention features and barriers and facilitators only identified in practical application of interventions. It is thus especially useful where hypothesised mechanisms in an existing programme theory have failed. A further benefit of the approach is its ability to identify potentially new configurations of components that have not yet been evaluated. CONCLUSIONS ICA is a formal and rigorous yet relatively streamlined approach to identify key intervention content and implementation processes. ICA addresses a critical need for knowledge translation around complex interventions to support policy decisions and evidence implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katy Sutcliffe
- EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University College London (UCL), 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NS, UK.
| | - James Thomas
- EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University College London (UCL), 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NS, UK.
| | - Gillian Stokes
- EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University College London (UCL), 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NS, UK.
| | - Kate Hinds
- EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University College London (UCL), 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NS, UK.
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University College London (UCL), 18 Woburn Square, London, WC1H 0NS, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Oliver S, Bangpan M, Stansfield C, Stewart R. Capacity for conducting systematic reviews in low- and middle-income countries: a rapid appraisal. Health Res Policy Syst 2015; 13:23. [PMID: 25928625 PMCID: PMC4443541 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-015-0012-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2014] [Accepted: 04/14/2015] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Systematic reviews of research are increasingly recognised as important for informing decisions across policy sectors and for setting priorities for research. Although reviews draw on international research, the host institutions and countries can focus attention on their own priorities. The uneven capacity for conducting research around the world raises questions about the capacity for conducting systematic reviews. Methods A rapid appraisal was conducted of current capacity and capacity strengthening activities for conducting systematic reviews in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). A systems approach to analysis considered the capacity of individuals nested within the larger units of research teams, institutions that fund, support, and/or conduct systematic reviews, and systems that support systematic reviewing internationally. Results International systematic review networks, and their support organisations, are dominated by members from high-income countries. The largest network comprising a skilled workforce and established centres is the Cochrane Collaboration. Other networks, although smaller, provide support for systematic reviews addressing questions beyond effective clinical practice which require a broader range of methods. Capacity constraints were apparent at the levels of individuals, review teams, organisations, and system wide. Constraints at each level limited the capacity at levels nested within them. Skills training for individuals had limited utility if not allied to opportunities for review teams to practice the skills. Skills development was further constrained by language barriers, lack of support from academic organisations, and the limitations of wider systems for communication and knowledge management. All networks hosted some activities for strengthening the capacities of individuals and teams, although these were usually independent of core academic programmes and traditional career progression. Even rarer were efforts to increase demand for systematic reviews and to strengthen links between producers and potential users of systematic reviews. Conclusions Limited capacity for conducting systematic reviews within LMICs presents a major technical and social challenge to advancing their health systems. Effective capacity in LMICs can be spread through investing effort at multiple levels simultaneously, supported by countries (predominantly high-income countries) with established skills and experience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandy Oliver
- UCL Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL, UK.
| | - Mukdarut Bangpan
- UCL Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL, UK.
| | | | - Ruth Stewart
- University of Johannesburg, House 2, Research Village, Bunting Road Campus, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, South Africa.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Bangpan M, Operario D. 'The family is only one part …': understanding the role of family in young Thai women's sexual decision making. Cult Health Sex 2014; 16:381-396. [PMID: 24597979 DOI: 10.1080/13691058.2014.886723] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2013] [Accepted: 01/20/2014] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
This study aims to understand young Thai women's perspectives about family influences on their sexual decisions with the goal of informing the future development of HIV programmes and interventions for young Thai women in urban areas. Eight focus groups were conducted with 40 young single women aged 18-25 years, recruited through a peer network of key informants from four sites across Bangkok: universities, government offices, slums and garment factories. Predetermined topics relating to family, sexual decisions and HIV were discussed with 4-5 participants in each group. Qualitative thematic and framework-analysis techniques were used to explore participants' narratives. Findings suggest that young Thai women's sexual decisions are complex and take place under a wide range of personal, familial and social influences. Parents were perceived as a barrier to parent-child communication about sex and HIV. Young women regarded mothers as more supportive and receptive than fathers when discussing sensitive topics. Young Thai women described a tension between having a strong sense of self and modern sexual norms versus traditionally conservative relational orientations. Future HIV interventions could benefit by developing strategies to consider barriers to parent-child communication, strengthening family relationships and addressing the coexistence of conflicting sexual norms in the Thai context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mukdarut Bangpan
- a Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London , London , UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Affiliation(s)
- Mukdarut Bangpan
- a Department of Social Policy and Intervention , Oxford University , Oxford , UK
- b The Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), Social Science Research Unit , Institute of Education , London , UK
| | - Don Operario
- c Department of Community Health , Brown University , Providence , RI , USA
| |
Collapse
|