背景:移民与健康之间的关系主要集中在永久移民上,尽管非永久性移民占全球移民的很大一部分。非永久性移民可能有不同的需求,影响他们的健康结果。本系统评价1)审查了关于非永久性移民与非传染性慢性疾病(NCDs)的健康结果是否与其他人群不同的证据,2)试图描述如何定义和衡量非永久性移民。
方法:对于本系统综述,我们开发了一个全面的搜索字符串,以查找有关非永久性迁移和疾病的术语以及三种非传染性疾病的筛查率(癌症,心脏病,和糖尿病),并使用搜索字符串搜索了13个电子数据库。作者审查并评估了文章以进行全文审查;手工搜索特定期刊和灰色文献;并扫描了相关研究的参考列表。作者根据流行病学研究的标准报告提取和评估数据。
结果:我们确定了12篇同行评审的文章,这些文章检查了非永久性移民与其他人群相比的非传染性疾病结果。一些研究表明,与其他群体相比,非永久性移民的非传染性疾病结果更差或没有显着差异。这些条款反映了非永久性移民之间存在的巨大差异,从经济移民到游牧民族。
结论:与其他群体相比,非永久性移民的非传染性疾病结局有所不同。我们纳入的研究在他们的研究设计和非永久性迁移的定义和测量方面是异质的,与其他人群相比,这限制了对人群健康做出结论性陈述的能力。研究需要更多的标准化,以更好地了解这些人群的多样性,并量化非永久性移民与其他群体之间风险因素和疾病发生率的差异。
BACKGROUND: The relationship between migration and health has primarily focused on permanent migrants, although non-permanent migrants comprise a large proportion of global migrants. Non-permanent migrants may have distinct needs that affect their health outcomes. This systematic
review 1) examined the evidence concerning whether non-permanent migrants have different health outcomes than other population groups for non-communicable chronic diseases (NCDs) and 2) sought to describe how non-permanent migration is defined and measured.
METHODS: For this systematic
review, we developed a comprehensive search string for terms about non-permanent migration and disease and screening rates for three NCDs (cancer, heart disease, and diabetes) and searched thirteen electronic databases using the search string. Authors reviewed and evaluated articles for full-text
review; hand-searched specific journals and grey literature; and scanned reference lists of relevant studies. Authors extracted and assessed data based on standard reporting for epidemiologic studies.
RESULTS: We identified twelve peer-reviewed articles that examined NCD outcomes for non-permanent migrants as compared to other populations. Some studies showed worse or no significant differences in the NCD outcomes for non-permanent migrants compared to other groups. The articles reflected substantial diversity that exists among non-permanent migrants, which ranged from economic migrants to nomadic populations.
CONCLUSIONS: Non-permanent migrants varied in their NCD outcomes as compared to other groups. Our included studies were heterogenous in their study designs and their definitions and measurement of non-permanent migration, which limited the ability to make conclusive statements about the health of the populations as compared to other populations. More standardization is needed in research to better understand the diversity in these populations and quantify differences in risk factors and disease rates between non-permanent migrants and other groups.