Cecilia Jakobsson, Rhea Sanghavi, Joseph Nyamiobo, Caitlin Maloy, Arnold Mwanzu, Katherine Venturo-Conerly, Cyprian Mostert, Stefan Peterson, Manasi Kumar
{"title":"中低收入国家的青少年友好型健康干预措施:范围界定审查。","authors":"Cecilia Jakobsson, Rhea Sanghavi, Joseph Nyamiobo, Caitlin Maloy, Arnold Mwanzu, Katherine Venturo-Conerly, Cyprian Mostert, Stefan Peterson, Manasi Kumar","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adolescents comprise one-sixth of the world's population, yet there is no clear understanding of the features that promote adolescent-friendly services (AFS). The lack of clarity and consistency around a definition presents a gap in health services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed empirical studies to explore AFS in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) published between January 2000 and December 2022. The databases searched were CAB Direct (n=11), CINAHL (n=50), Cochrane Databases (n=1103), Embase (n=1164), Global Health Medicus (n=3636) and PsycINFO (n=156). The title, abstract and full text were double screened by three independent reviewers. Three independent reviewers assessed the study's quality using the Joanna Briggs Initiative Quality Appraisal and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified the key components, barriers and facilitators of AFS. The following emerged from our review: a non-judgmental environment, culturally appropriate and responsive interventions and a focus on supporting marginalised communities often living in high-poverty settings. Using these components, we have extended guidance around a possible framework and tool assessing quality of AFS.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>As LMICs are heterogeneous and unique, it was assumed that the operational definition of 'adolescent-friendly' might vary depending on different contexts, but there must be core components that remain consistent. Possible limitations of our review include a lack of grey literature. Potential future implications include training healthcare providers, testing these attributes for service improvement and future development and localisation of policy guidelines.</p><p><strong>Key highlights: </strong>Our review has mapped the research framing of AFS and provided a comprehensive review of barriers and facilitators to implementing a holistic outlook of AFS set-up in a tightly controlled research and real-world context. Our paper is one of the few efforts to synthesise behavioural and mental health elements underpinning AFS.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"9 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11381706/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adolescent and youth-friendly health interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Cecilia Jakobsson, Rhea Sanghavi, Joseph Nyamiobo, Caitlin Maloy, Arnold Mwanzu, Katherine Venturo-Conerly, Cyprian Mostert, Stefan Peterson, Manasi Kumar\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013393\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adolescents comprise one-sixth of the world's population, yet there is no clear understanding of the features that promote adolescent-friendly services (AFS). The lack of clarity and consistency around a definition presents a gap in health services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed empirical studies to explore AFS in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) published between January 2000 and December 2022. The databases searched were CAB Direct (n=11), CINAHL (n=50), Cochrane Databases (n=1103), Embase (n=1164), Global Health Medicus (n=3636) and PsycINFO (n=156). The title, abstract and full text were double screened by three independent reviewers. Three independent reviewers assessed the study's quality using the Joanna Briggs Initiative Quality Appraisal and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified the key components, barriers and facilitators of AFS. The following emerged from our review: a non-judgmental environment, culturally appropriate and responsive interventions and a focus on supporting marginalised communities often living in high-poverty settings. Using these components, we have extended guidance around a possible framework and tool assessing quality of AFS.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>As LMICs are heterogeneous and unique, it was assumed that the operational definition of 'adolescent-friendly' might vary depending on different contexts, but there must be core components that remain consistent. Possible limitations of our review include a lack of grey literature. Potential future implications include training healthcare providers, testing these attributes for service improvement and future development and localisation of policy guidelines.</p><p><strong>Key highlights: </strong>Our review has mapped the research framing of AFS and provided a comprehensive review of barriers and facilitators to implementing a holistic outlook of AFS set-up in a tightly controlled research and real-world context. Our paper is one of the few efforts to synthesise behavioural and mental health elements underpinning AFS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"9 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11381706/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013393\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013393","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:青少年占世界人口的六分之一,但人们对促进青少年友好型服务(AFS)的特征却没有清晰的认识。定义的不清晰和不一致是医疗服务中的一个空白:本综述遵循《系统综述和元分析的首选报告项目》(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews)指南进行。我们对 2000 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月间发表的同行评审实证研究进行了范围界定,以探讨低收入和中等收入国家(LMIC)的战地服务。检索的数据库包括:CAB Direct (n=11), CINAHL (n=50), Cochrane Databases (n=1103), Embase (n=1164), Global Health Medicus (n=3636) 和 PsycINFO (n=156)。标题、摘要和全文由三位独立审稿人进行双重筛选。三位独立审稿人使用 Joanna Briggs Initiative 质量评估和 Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 工具对研究质量进行评估:我们确定了 AFS 的关键组成部分、障碍和促进因素。我们在审查中发现了以下几点:非评判性环境、文化适宜性和响应性干预措施,以及重点支持通常生活在贫困环境中的边缘化社区。利用这些要素,我们围绕评估非洲战地服务质量的可能框架和工具扩展了指导:由于低收入与中等收入国家的情况各不相同且各具特色,因此我们认为 "青少年友好型 "的操作定义可能会因环境不同而有所差异,但其核心内容必须保持一致。我们的综述可能存在局限性,包括缺乏灰色文献。未来的潜在影响包括培训医疗服务提供者、测试这些属性以改进服务以及未来政策指南的制定和本地化:我们的综述描绘了美国战地服务的研究框架,并全面回顾了在严格控制的研究和现实世界背景下实施美国战地服务整体观的障碍和促进因素。我们的论文是为数不多的对支持战地服务团的行为和心理健康要素进行综合的文章之一。
Adolescent and youth-friendly health interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.
Background: Adolescents comprise one-sixth of the world's population, yet there is no clear understanding of the features that promote adolescent-friendly services (AFS). The lack of clarity and consistency around a definition presents a gap in health services.
Methods: The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed empirical studies to explore AFS in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) published between January 2000 and December 2022. The databases searched were CAB Direct (n=11), CINAHL (n=50), Cochrane Databases (n=1103), Embase (n=1164), Global Health Medicus (n=3636) and PsycINFO (n=156). The title, abstract and full text were double screened by three independent reviewers. Three independent reviewers assessed the study's quality using the Joanna Briggs Initiative Quality Appraisal and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tools.
Results: We identified the key components, barriers and facilitators of AFS. The following emerged from our review: a non-judgmental environment, culturally appropriate and responsive interventions and a focus on supporting marginalised communities often living in high-poverty settings. Using these components, we have extended guidance around a possible framework and tool assessing quality of AFS.
Interpretation: As LMICs are heterogeneous and unique, it was assumed that the operational definition of 'adolescent-friendly' might vary depending on different contexts, but there must be core components that remain consistent. Possible limitations of our review include a lack of grey literature. Potential future implications include training healthcare providers, testing these attributes for service improvement and future development and localisation of policy guidelines.
Key highlights: Our review has mapped the research framing of AFS and provided a comprehensive review of barriers and facilitators to implementing a holistic outlook of AFS set-up in a tightly controlled research and real-world context. Our paper is one of the few efforts to synthesise behavioural and mental health elements underpinning AFS.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.