PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: People experiencing homelessness are often marginalised and encounter structural barriers when seeking healthcare. Community-based oral health interventions highlighted the need of well-trained practitioners for the successful engagement of service users and behaviour change. However, a lack of adequate information and specific training has been previously reported. The adoption of inclusive approaches, such as co-design, to develop tailored and meaningful health promotion training and educational materials capable of addressing the specific needs of this group is required. Co-design entails active involvement of different groups in research processes that acknowledge participants\' needs and expectations. This scoping review aims to identify the available literature on the participation of people experiencing homelessness and/or their support workers in co-designing health and oral health promotion training/educational materials, approaches adopted, and barriers and enablers to develop these materials.
UNASSIGNED: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Scoping Review Methodology informed the development of the scoping review. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework. Six electronic databases (Medline (OVID), PsychInfo (OVID), Scopus, Web of Science, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA) (ProQuest) and CINHAL) were systematically searched using MeSH terms. An extensive grey literature search, consultation with experts and hand searching of reference lists took place. Records were screened independently and in duplicate using the Rayyan Qatar Computing Research Institute (QCRI) online tool, followed by qualitative content analysis involving descriptive data coding.
UNASSIGNED: Eight studies/materials were included. Key approaches adopted to co-design, enablers and barriers were captured. The enablers were inclusivity, a safe environment for positive participation, empowerment and flexibility, the barriers were difficulty in recruiting and sustaining participation, power differentials, and limited resources.
UNASSIGNED: The evidence in this area is limited. This scoping review provided foundations for further research to examine the impact of different components of the co-design process including the environment in which the co-design process is conducted. Further studies with experimental design and reported using appropriate study design frameworks detailing active components of the co-design process would strengthen the evidence base in this area.
UNASSIGNED: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Scoping Review Methodology informed the development of the scoping review. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework. Six electronic databases (Medline (OVID), PsychInfo (OVID), Scopus, Web of Science, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA) (ProQuest) and CINHAL) were systematically searched using MeSH terms. An extensive grey literature search, consultation with experts and hand searching of reference lists took place. Records were screened independently and in duplicate using the Rayyan Qatar Computing Research Institute (QCRI) online tool, followed by qualitative content analysis involving descriptive data coding.
UNASSIGNED: Eight studies/materials were included. Key approaches adopted to co-design, enablers and barriers were captured. The enablers were inclusivity, a safe environment for positive participation, empowerment and flexibility, the barriers were difficulty in recruiting and sustaining participation, power differentials, and limited resources.
UNASSIGNED: The evidence in this area is limited. This scoping review provided foundations for further research to examine the impact of different components of the co-design process including the environment in which the co-design process is conducted. Further studies with experimental design and reported using appropriate study design frameworks detailing active components of the co-design process would strengthen the evidence base in this area.
摘要：
■经历无家可归的人往往被边缘化，在寻求医疗保健时遇到结构性障碍。基于社区的口腔健康干预措施强调了训练有素的从业人员对服务使用者和行为改变的成功参与的需求。然而,以前曾报告缺乏足够的信息和具体培训。采取包容性方法，例如共同设计，需要制定有针对性和有意义的健康促进培训和教育材料，以满足该群体的特定需求。共同设计需要不同小组积极参与研究过程，以承认参与者的需求和期望。本范围审查旨在确定有关无家可归的人和/或他们的支持工作者参与共同设计健康和口腔健康促进培训/教育材料的可用文献，采用的方法，以及开发这些材料的障碍和推动者。
■乔安娜·布里格斯研究所（JBI）范围审查方法为范围审查的发展提供了信息。该协议已在开放科学框架上注册。六个电子数据库(Medline(OVID)，PsychInfo(OVID),Scopus,WebofScience,使用MeSH术语系统地搜索了应用社会科学索引和摘要（ASSIA）（ProQuest）和CINHAL。广泛的灰色文献搜索，与专家进行了磋商，并手工搜索了参考清单。使用Rayyan卡塔尔计算研究所（QCRI）在线工具对记录进行了独立和一式两份的筛选，其次是涉及描述性数据编码的定性内容分析。
■包括8项研究/材料。共同设计采用的关键方法，捕获了推动者和障碍。推动者是包容性的，积极参与的安全环境，赋权和灵活性，障碍是难以招募和维持参与，功率差,和有限的资源。
■这方面的证据有限。此范围审查为进一步研究提供了基础，以检查共同设计过程中不同组件的影响，包括进行共同设计过程的环境。通过实验设计进行进一步的研究，并使用适当的研究设计框架进行报告，详细说明了共同设计过程的有效组成部分，这将加强该领域的证据基础。
■乔安娜·布里格斯研究所（JBI）范围审查方法为范围审查的发展提供了信息。该协议已在开放科学框架上注册。六个电子数据库(Medline(OVID)，PsychInfo(OVID),Scopus,WebofScience,使用MeSH术语系统地搜索了应用社会科学索引和摘要（ASSIA）（ProQuest）和CINHAL。广泛的灰色文献搜索，与专家进行了磋商，并手工搜索了参考清单。使用Rayyan卡塔尔计算研究所（QCRI）在线工具对记录进行了独立和一式两份的筛选，其次是涉及描述性数据编码的定性内容分析。
■包括8项研究/材料。共同设计采用的关键方法，捕获了推动者和障碍。推动者是包容性的，积极参与的安全环境，赋权和灵活性，障碍是难以招募和维持参与，功率差,和有限的资源。
■这方面的证据有限。此范围审查为进一步研究提供了基础，以检查共同设计过程中不同组件的影响，包括进行共同设计过程的环境。通过实验设计进行进一步的研究，并使用适当的研究设计框架进行报告，详细说明了共同设计过程的有效组成部分，这将加强该领域的证据基础。
