暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Maternal health service uptake remains an important predictor of maternal outcomes including maternal mortality. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the available evidence on the uptake of maternal health care services in developing countries and to assess the impact of place of residence, education status, and wealth index on the uptake of these services.
UNASSIGNED: We examined the databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, and Scopus until June 14, 2022. Cross-sectional studies done between 2015 and 2022 were considered. Mothers of reproductive age and all states of health were included in the study. Independently, two authors determined the eligibility of studies, extracted data, evaluated the risk of bias, and ranked the evidence\'s degree of certainty. To combine the data, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis. The PROSPERO registration ID is CRD42022304094.
UNASSIGNED: We included 51 studies. Mothers living in urban areas were three times more likely to receive antenatal care (OR 2.95; 95% CI 2.23 to 3.89; 15 studies; 340,390 participants) than rural mothers. Compared with no education, those with primary education were twice as likely to utilize antenatal care (OR 2.36; 95% CI 1.80 to 3.09; 9 studies; 154,398 participants) and those with secondary and higher education were six and fourteen times more likely to utilize antenatal care, respectively. Mothers in the second wealth index were twice as likely as mothers in the lowest wealth index to utilize antenatal care (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.91; 10 studies; 224,530 participants) and antenatal care utilization increased further among mothers in the higher wealth index. We observed similar relative inequalities in skilled delivery care and postnatal care utilization based on the pace of residence, education, and wealth index.
UNASSIGNED: In developing countries, the problem of inequity in utilizing maternal health care services persists and needs considerable attention.

BACKGROUND: The Cost of Living Crisis (CoLC), a real term reduction in basic income, risks individuals being unable to afford essentials such as heat, food and clothing. The impact of the CoLC is disproportionate - with different population sub-groups more likely to be negatively affected. The objective of this survey was to evaluate the perceived impact of the CoLC on the life and health of participants across four European countries.
METHODS: A survey housing two questions to investigate the relationship between the CoLC and its perceived impact on life and health was developed. Four European countries (U.K., Sweden, Italy and Germany) took part via the YouGov platform. Logistic regression models were created for each country and question to evaluate which population characteristics were associated with a negative reported impact of the CoLC.
RESULTS: A total of 8,152 unique individuals responded between 17th March and 30th March 2023. Each country was equally represented. Those aged 36-64 were more likely to report a negative impact of the CoLC on their life and health than younger participants (p < 0.001, p = 0.02 respectively). Across all countries, females were significantly more likely to report a negative impact on their life and health, however, when analysed according to country, in Sweden females were less likely to report a negative impact (p < 0.001). Those in lower income families or who reported poor health in the preceding 12 months were significantly more likely to report a negative impact of the CoLC on their life and health. There was no difference within the participant group on the reported impact of the CoLC based on location (rural vs. urban).
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the disproportionate negative impact of the CoLC on both life and health in different population subgroups. Germany and Sweden appeared to be more resilient to the effects of the CoLC, particularly for certain population subgroups. It is important to understand the differing effects of a CoLC, and to learn from successful health and economic strategies in order to create targeted policy and create a population resilient to economic shocks.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which governments provide socioeconomic supports has been highlighted by their spending during the COVID-19 pandemic. This has implications for patterns of inequality, in particular on exacerbating unequal health and well-being.
RESULTS: Inequity has expanded due to neoliberalism, a market-based approach that has endured for more than four decades. Together with COVID-19, it has developed and exposed many structural governance differences.
CONCLUSIONS: There are a number of examples presented of the effects of inequalities on health and well-being. The role of general practice in addressing these is discussed and challenges are highlighted, especially those relating to payment systems and workforce constraints.

BACKGROUND: Although underserved populations- including those from ethnic minority communities and those living in poverty-have worse health and poorer healthcare experiences, most primary care research does not fairly reflect these groups. Patient and public involvement (PPI) is usually embedded within research studies in the United Kingdom (UK), but often fails to represent underserved populations. This study worked with patient and public contributors and local community leaders, situated in a socio-economically deprived and ethnically diverse urban area, to explore under-representation in primary healthcare research.
METHODS: We undertook a focus group with a purposive sample of 6 members of a Patient and Public Involvement Group (PPIG), and interviews with 4 community leaders (representing Black, South Asian, Roma and socio-economically deprived communities). An iterative analysis process based on template analysis was used. Focus group 1 was rapidly analysed, and a template created. Findings were presented in focus group 2, and the template further developed. The Cultural Trauma concept was than applied to the template to give a wider theoretical lens. In-depth analysis of focus groups and interviews was then performed based on the template.
RESULTS: Wider societal and historical influences have degraded trust in academic and healthcare institutions within underserved populations. Along with more practical considerations, trust underpins personal motivations to engage with research. Researchers need to invest time and resources in prolonged, mutually beneficial engagement with communities of importance to their research, including sharing power and influence over research priorities. Researcher reflexivity regarding differential power and cultural competencies are crucial. Utilising participatory methodologies including co-production demonstrates a commitment to inclusive study design.
CONCLUSIONS: Re-framing evidence-based medicine to be more useful and relevant to underserved populations with the highest burden of ill health is urgently needed. Lack of representation in primary healthcare research reflects wider societal inequalities, to which Cultural Trauma provides a useful lens. However, there are actions that researchers can take to widen representation. This will ultimately help achieve the goal of increased health equity by enhancing scientific rigour and research generalizability.
OBJECTIVE: People living in poverty, and people from ethnic minority communities may be referred to as ‘underserved’. Underserved communities benefit less from health services, and along with other factors, this leads to health inequalities. Primary care research does not include enough people from these communities. This makes the health inequalities  worse.
UNASSIGNED: This study looks at why people from underserved communities are not included in research. It also looks at what might help. We had focus group discussions with members of a Patient and Public Involvement Group (PPIG). These are individuals who do not have research expertise, but use their lived experience as patients to influence the research process. This group was formed in 2017, from areas where more people live with social disadvantage. We also interviewed local community leaders. Interviews and focus groups ask open questions, so are a good way to explore what people think about an issue. We found a useful theory about how cultural history affects what people can do. We used this to help us to understand how our findings could improve and widen participation in research within underserved communities.
UNASSIGNED: We found that trust is very important. There needs to be trust between people and organisations. There are also practical reasons people from underserved communities might not be able to get involved in research. Researchers need to be aware of these things, and work with people from these communities throughout all stages of research. Long term relationships need to develop between institutions and people doing research. Understanding each other’s culture and history makes it easier to work together.

OBJECTIVE: Youth sports are increasingly shifting towards a \"pay to play\" model which has introduced financial barriers to participation. The Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) is the main organization for club basketball, serving as a platform where young athletes can compete beyond the recreational level. Outside the realm of athletes who have access to state-of-the-art facilities and top-tier coaching, the pathway to playing basketball at the next level may be predominantly available to those who can afford the considerable costs of AAU participation. The objective of this study is to determine the accessibility of AAU teams of active National Basketball Association (NBA) players through use of the Area Deprivation Index (ADI).
RESULTS: We identified 114 AAU teams with physical addresses for 250 (50%) currently active domestic NBA players. The State ADI of the high schools as well as national and state ADIs of prior AAU teams of active NBA players were significantly skewed toward lower ADI rankings (higher socioeconomic status) (p < 0.05). The mean distance between high school location and AAU location was 170 miles. Prior AAU teams of currently active NBA players are more frequently located in areas of higher socioeconomic status with nearly 50% being within the top 3rd lower state decile as measured by the area deprivation index. Similarly, we found the high schools these players attended, as a proxy for areas they grew up in, were also more frequently located in areas of higher socioeconomic status.

UNASSIGNED: Cervical cancer is one of the most preventable cancers yet remains a disease of inequity for people with intellectual disability, in part due to low screening rates. The ScreenEQUAL project will use an integrated knowledge translation (iKT) model to co-produce and evaluate accessible cervical screening resources with and for this group.
UNASSIGNED: Stage 1 will qualitatively explore facilitators and barriers to screening participation for people with intellectual disability, families and support people, healthcare providers and disability sector stakeholders (n ≈ 20 in each group). An accessible multimodal screening resource, accompanying supporting materials for families and support people, and trauma-informed healthcare provider training materials will then be co-produced through a series of workshops. Stage 2 will recruit people with intellectual disability aged 25 to 74 who are due or overdue for screening into a single-arm trial (n = 48). Trained support people will provide them with the co-produced resource in accessible workshops (intervention) and support them in completing pre-post questions to assess informed decision-making. A subset will participate in qualitative post-intervention interviews including optional body-mapping (n ≈ 20). Screening uptake in the 9-months following the intervention will be measured through data linkage. Family members and support people (n = 48) and healthcare providers (n = 433) will be recruited into single-arm sub-studies. Over a 4-month period they will, respectively, receive the accompanying supporting materials, and the trauma-informed training materials. Both groups will complete pre-post online surveys. A subset of each group (n ≈ 20) will be invited to participate in post-intervention semi-structured interviews.
UNASSIGNED: Our primary outcome is a change in informed decision-making by people with intellectual disability across the domains of knowledge, attitudes, and screening intention. Secondary outcomes include: (i) uptake of screening in the 9-months following the intervention workshops, (ii) changes in health literacy, attitudes and self-efficacy of family members and support people, and (iii) changes in knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy and preparedness of screening providers. Each participant group will evaluate acceptability, feasibility and usability of the resources.
UNASSIGNED: If found to be effective and acceptable, the co-produced cervical screening resources and training materials will be made freely available through the ScreenEQUAL website to support national, and potentially international, scale-up.

Social, environmental, and biological risk factors influence exposures to newly termed \'biosocial determinants of health\'. As molecular factors that lie at the intersection between lived experiences and individual biology, biosocial determinants may inform on the enduring complexity of cancer disparity across transdisciplinary studies.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Groups which are marginalised, disadvantaged or otherwise vulnerable have lower uptake of vaccinations. This differential has been amplified in COVID-19 vaccination compared to (e.g.) influenza vaccination. This overview assessed the effectiveness of interventions to increase vaccination in underserved, minority or vulnerable groups.
METHODS: In November 2022 we searched four databases for systematic reviews that included RCTs evaluating any intervention to increase vaccination in underserved, minority or vulnerable groups; our primary outcome was vaccination. We used rapid review methods to screen, extract data and assess risk of bias in identified reviews. We undertook narrative synthesis using an approach modified from SWiM guidance. We categorised interventions as being high, medium or low intensity, and as targeting vaccine demand, access, or providers.
RESULTS: We included 23 systematic reviews, including studies in high and low or middle income countries, focused on children, adolescents and adults. Groups were vulnerable based on socioeconomic status, minority ethnicity, migrant/refugee status, age, location or LGBTQ identity. Pregnancy/maternity sometimes intersected with vulnerabilities. Evidence supported interventions including: home visits to communicate/educate and to vaccinate, and facilitator visits to practices (high intensity); telephone calls to communicate/educate, remind/book appointments (medium intensity); letters, postcards or text messages to communicate/educate, remind/book appointments and reminder/recall interventions for practices (low intensity). Many studies used multiple interventions or components.
CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable evidence supporting the effectiveness of communication in person, by phone or in writing to increase vaccination. Both high and low intensity interventions targeting providers showed effectiveness. Limited evidence assessed additional clinics or targeted services for increasing access; only home visits had higher confidence evidence showing effectiveness. There was no evidence for interventions for some communities, such as religious minorities which may intersect with gaps in evidence for additional services. None of the evidence related to COVID-19 vaccination where inequalities of outcome are exacerbated.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42021293355.