Suchergebnisse

AbstractObjectiveOur purpose is to answer the following question: What mechanisms or components of programs, groups, or interventions improve psychological and social aspects of the lives of siblings of children who have intellectual/developmental disabilities (IDD)? Secondly, using a realist review format, we develop program theories and recommendations that can guide current and future sibling support programs.BackgroundThere is evidence that having a sibling with IDD can affect the physical health, behavior, and mental health of siblings who do not have IDD. As a result, support programs have been developed for these nondisabled siblings.MethodsWe conducted a realist review of 31 studies assessing support programs for siblings of children with IDD. Gray literature was also included. Applying the realist paradigm, we identified program contexts, mechanisms that promote program effectiveness, and the outcomes of the programs.ResultsWe found that contextual information was often lacking in the research and no studies examined the effectiveness of individual program components. However, the mechanisms of validation of feelings and experiences, time with parents, and respite were observed as beneficial for the siblings. From our analysis and using a realist review paradigm, we developed four program theories that reflect the siblings' experiences in the various programs.ConclusionThe four program theories derived from this realist review can be summarized as "I am not the only one," "I have needs too," "I need my parents' attention," and "I need a break."ImplicationsBased upon the four theories, we offer recommendations to guide program development.

Background Medication reconciliation (MedRec), a process to reduce medication error at care transitions, is labour- and resource-intensive and time-consuming. Use of Personal Electronic Records of Medications (PERMs) in health information systems to support MedRec have proven challenging. Relatively little is known about the design, use or implementation of PERMs at care transitions that impacts on MedRec in the 'real world'. To respond to this gap in knowledge we undertook a rapid realist review (RRR). The aim was to develop theories to explain how, why, when, where and for whom PERMs are designed, implemented or used in practice at care transitions that impacts on MedRec. Methodology We used realist methodology and undertook the RRR between August 2020 and February 2021. We collaborated with experts in the field to identify key themes. Articles were sourced from four databases (Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL Complete and OpenGrey) to contribute to the theory development. Quality assessment, screening and data extraction using NVivo was completed. Contexts, mechanisms and outcomes configurations were identified and synthesised. The experts considered these theories for relevance and practicality and suggested refinements. Results Ten provisional theories were identified from 19 articles. Some theories relate to the design (T2 Inclusive design, T3 PERMs complement existing good processes, T7 Interoperability), some relate to the implementation (T5 Tailored training, T9 Positive impact of legislation or governance), some relate to use (T6 Support and on-demand training) and others relate iteratively to all stages of the process (T1 Engage stakeholders, T4 Build trust, T8 Resource investment, T10 Patients as users of PERMs). Conclusions This RRR has allowed additional valuable data to be extracted from existing primary research, with minimal resources, that may impact positively on future developments in this area. The theories are interdependent to a greater or lesser extent; several or all of the theories may need to be in play to collectively impact on the design, implementation or use of PERMs for MedRec at care transitions. These theories should now be incorporated into an intervention and evaluated to further test their validity.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner abuse (including coercive control, physical, sexual, economic, emotional and economic abuse) is common worldwide. Advocacy may help women who are in, or have left, an abusive intimate relationship, to stop or reduce repeat victimisation and overcome consequences of the abuse. Advocacy primarily involves education, safety planning support and increasing access to different services. It may be stand‐alone or part of other services and interventions, and may be provided within healthcare, criminal justice, social, government or specialist domestic violence services. We focus on the abuse of women, as interventions for abused men require different considerations. OBJECTIVES: To assess advocacy interventions for intimate partner abuse in women, in terms of which interventions work for whom, why and in what circumstances. SEARCH METHODS: In January 2019 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, 12 other databases, two trials registers and two relevant websites. The search had three phases: scoping of articles to identify candidate theories; iterative recursive search for studies to explore and fill gaps in these theories; and systematic search for studies to test, confirm or refute our explanatory theory. SELECTION CRITERIA: Empirical studies of any advocacy or multi‐component intervention including advocacy, intended for women aged 15 years and over who were experiencing or had experienced any form of intimate partner abuse, or of advocates delivering such interventions, or experiences of women who were receiving or had received such an intervention. Partner abuse encompasses coercive control in the absence of physical abuse. For theory development, we included studies that did not strictly fit our original criteria but provided information useful for theory development. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors independently extracted data, with double assessment of 10% of the data, and assessed risk of bias and quality of the evidence. We adopted RAMESES (Realist and meta‐narrative evidence ...

An overview of internationally published literature on what works for co-production in youth mental health services is missing, despite a practice and policy context strongly recommending this approach. The proposed rapid realist review aims to develop a theory about how and why co-production methods in youth mental health services work (or do not work), for whom, in which contexts, and through what mechanisms. Relevant evidence will be synthesised to develop context–mechanism–outcome (CMO) configurations that can inform policy and practice. Stakeholders will be iteratively involved in the development of these theories (CMO configurations) by engaging an expert panel and youth advisory group. The review results will be reported according to the RAMESES guidelines and are intended to be published in an academic journal. Additionally, a plain English summary will be produced with the support of the youth advisory group.

BACKGROUND: Medication reconciliation (MedRec), a process to reduce medication error at care transitions, is labour- and resource-intensive and time-consuming. Use of Personal Electronic Records of Medications (PERMs) in health information systems to support MedRec have proven challenging. Relatively little is known about the design, use or implementation of PERMs at care transitions that impacts on MedRec in the 'real world'. To respond to this gap in knowledge we undertook a rapid realist review (RRR). The aim was to develop theories to explain how, why, when, where and for whom PERMs are designed, implemented or used in practice at care transitions that impacts on MedRec. METHODOLOGY: We used realist methodology and undertook the RRR between August 2020 and February 2021. We collaborated with experts in the field to identify key themes. Articles were sourced from four databases (Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL Complete and OpenGrey) to contribute to the theory development. Quality assessment, screening and data extraction using NVivo was completed. Contexts, mechanisms and outcomes configurations were identified and synthesised. The experts considered these theories for relevance and practicality and suggested refinements. RESULTS: Ten provisional theories were identified from 19 articles. Some theories relate to the design (T2 Inclusive design, T3 PERMs complement existing good processes, T7 Interoperability), some relate to the implementation (T5 Tailored training, T9 Positive impact of legislation or governance), some relate to use (T6 Support and on-demand training) and others relate iteratively to all stages of the process (T1 Engage stakeholders, T4 Build trust, T8 Resource investment, T10 Patients as users of PERMs). CONCLUSIONS: This RRR has allowed additional valuable data to be extracted from existing primary research, with minimal resources, that may impact positively on future developments in this area. The theories are interdependent to a greater or lesser extent; several or all of the theories may need ...

Summary Meetings to enhance shared decision-making, such as family group conferences, potentially contribute to enhancing meaningful involvement of families. Such meetings are also claimed by some to reduce the need for children to be in care, either by increasing support from family for parents or by identifying care from within the family network. This rapid realist review aims to develop an understanding of how meetings that facilitate shared decision-making between professionals and families might work to safely reduce the need for children to be in care. It identifies mechanisms that are thought to make a difference and contextual factors that influence the impact of identified mechanisms. Findings A comprehensive search of academic and gray literature identified 64 documents spanning seven types of shared decision-making meetings. Data from these papers were collected using an iterative process of juxtaposition, comparison, contrast, and combination with a developing program theory. Data from the literature was supplemented with consultation to ensure relevance to the UK setting. The review identified three key mechanisms that made shared decision-making meetings more likely to be effective in safely reducing children's entry to care: enabling participation and engagement; building trust and reducing shame; enabling participation in decision-making processes. It describes how these work before, during, and after meetings. Applications The findings help us understand the complicated research findings about the relationship between meetings and care entry and provide a theory about what is needed to make such meetings work that is of practical use for practice and future research

AbstractConflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) against women and girls has been the subject of increasing research and scholarship. Less is known about the health of men, boys and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and other gender non-binary persons who survive CRSV. This paper is the first systematic realist review on medical, mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) interventions that focusses on male and LGBT survivors of CRSV. The review explores the gender differences in context, mechanisms and outcomes that underpin interventions addressing the health and psychosocial wellbeing of male and LGBT survivors. The aim is to contribute to the design and delivery of gender-sensitive and, when needed, gender-specific approaches for interventions that respond to specific needs of different groups of all survivors. We conducted a systematic search of academic and grey literature to identify medical and MHPSS interventions that included men, boys and LGBT survivors. We identified interventions specifically targeting women and girls that we used as comparators. We then purposively sampled studies from the fields of gender and health, and sexual abuse against men and LGBT people for theory building and testing. We identified 26 evaluations of interventions for survivors of CRSV. Nine studies included male survivors, twelve studies focussed exclusively on female survivors and one study targeted children and adolescents. No intervention evaluation focussed on LGBT survivors of CRSV. The interventions that included male survivors did not describe specific components for this population. Results of intervention evaluations that included male survivors were not disaggregated by gender, and some studies did not report the gender composition. Although some mental health and psychosocial consequences of sexual violence against men and boys may be similar among male and female survivors, the way each process trauma, display symptoms, seek help, adhere to treatment and improve their mental health differ by gender. Initiatives targeting male and LGBT survivors of CRSV need to be designed to actively address specific gender differences in access, adherence and response to MHPSS interventions. Models of care that are gender-sensitive and integrated to local resources are promising avenues to promote the health of male and LGBT survivors of CRSV.

OBJECTIVE: Public and patient involvement is increasingly embedded as a core activity in research funding calls and best practice guidelines. However, there is recognition of the challenges that prevail to achieve genuine and equitable forms of engagement. Our objective was to identify the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research. METHODS: A rapid realist review of the literature that included: (a) a systematic search of CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed and Open Grey (2007‐2017); (b) documents provided by expert panel members of relevant journals and grey literature. Six reference panels were undertaken with homeless, women's, transgender, disability and Traveller and Roma organizations to capture local insights. Data were extracted into a theory‐based grid linking context to behaviour change policy categories. MAIN RESULTS: From the review, 20 documents were identified and combined with the reference panel summaries. The expert panel reached consensus about 33 programme theories. These relate to environmental and social planning (7); service provision (6); guidelines (4); fiscal measures (6); communication and marketing (4); and regulation and legislation (6). CONCLUSIONS: While there is growing evidence of the merits of undertaking PPI, this rarely extends to the meaningful involvement of seldom heard groups. The 33 programme theories agreed by the expert panel point to a variety of mechanisms and resources that need to be considered. Many of the programme theories identified point to the need for a radical shift in current practice to enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups.

BACKGROUND: Public health concerns relating to international investment liberalization have centred on the potential for investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS)-related regulatory chill. However, the broader political and economic dimensions that shape the relationship between the international investment regime and non-communicable disease (NCD) policy development have been less well explored. This review aimed to synthesise the available evidence using a political economy approach, to understand why, how and under what conditions transnational corporations may use the international investment regime to promote NCD prevention policy non-decisions. MAIN BODY: Methods: Mechanisms explaining why/how the international investment regime may be used by transnational health-harmful commodity corporations (THCCs) to encourage NCD prevention policy non-decisions, including regulatory chill, were iteratively developed. Six databases and relevant grey literature was searched, and evidence was extracted, synthesized and mapped against the various proposed explanatory mechanisms. Findings: Eighty-nine sources were included. THCCs may be incentivised to use the ISDS mechanism since the costs may be outweighed by the benefits of even just delaying regulatory adoption, particularly since the chilling effect tends to ripple out across jurisdictions. Drivers of regulatory chill may include ambiguity in treaty terms, inconsistency in arbitral rulings, potential arbitrator bias and the high cost of arbitration. Evidence indicates ISDS can delay policy adoption both within the country directly involved but also in other jurisdictions. Additionally, governments are adopting standard assessments of public health regulatory proposals for trade and ISDS risk. Various economic, political and industry-related factors likely interact to increase (or decrease) the ultimate risk of regulatory chill. Some evidence indicates that THCCs take advantage of governments' prioritization of foreign investment over NCD prevention objectives to ...

Objective: Public and patient involvement is increasingly embedded as a core activity in research funding calls and best practice guidelines. However, there is recognition of the challenges that prevail to achieve genuine and equitable forms of engagement. Our objective was to identify the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research. Methods: A rapid realist review of the literature that included: (a) a systematic search of CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed and Open Grey (2007‐2017); (b) documents provided by expert panel members of relevant journals and grey literature. Six reference panels were undertaken with homeless, women's, transgender, disability and Traveller and Roma organizations to capture local insights. Data were extracted into a theory‐based grid linking context to behaviour change policy categories. Main results: From the review, 20 documents were identified and combined with the reference panel summaries. The expert panel reached consensus about 33 programme theories. These relate to environmental and social planning (7); service provision (6); guidelines (4); fiscal measures (6); communication and marketing (4); and regulation and legislation (6). Conclusions: While there is growing evidence of the merits of undertaking PPI, this rarely extends to the meaningful involvement of seldom heard groups. The 33 programme theories agreed by the expert panel point to a variety of mechanisms and resources that need to be considered. Many of the programme theories identified point to the need for a radical shift in current practice to enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups. ; Health Research Board

peer-reviewed ; Objective: Public and patient involvement is increasingly embedded as a core activity in research funding calls and best practice guidelines. However, there is recognition of the challenges that prevail to achieve genuine and equitable forms of engagement. Our objective was to identify the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research. Methods: A rapid realist review of the literature that included: (a) a systematic search of CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed and Open Grey (2007-2017); (b) documents provided by expert panel members of relevant journals and grey literature. Six reference panels were undertaken with homeless, women's, transgender, disability and Traveller and Roma organizations to capture local insights. Data were extracted into a theory-based grid linking context to behaviour change policy categories. Main results: From the review, 20 documents were identified and combined with the reference panel summaries. The expert panel reached consensus about 33 programme theories. These relate to environmental and social planning (7); service provision (6); guidelines (4); fiscal measures (6); communication and marketing (4); and regulation and legislation (6). Conclusions: While there is growing evidence of the merits of undertaking PPI, this rarely extends to the meaningful involvement of seldom heard groups. The 33 programme theories agreed by the expert panel point to a variety of mechanisms and resources that need to be considered. Many of the programme theories identified point to the need for a radical shift in current practice to enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups.

Canada is an international leader in major natural resource and large-scale infrastructure projects, which substantially contribute to the domestic economy. Notwithstanding, major projects in rural and remote regions can pose significant challenges for population health equity, defined as the absence of avoidable differences in health determinants, status, and outcomes between geographic, socio-economic, or demographic communities and sub-populations. In these regions, a more equitable sharing of risks and benefits with Indigenous peoples and affected communities could help to address the ongoing legacy of colonialism, environmental injustice, and systemic oppression tied to histories of major project development. Consequently, public deliberations and decision-making about the impacts of projects should consider population health equity throughout the exploration, construction, operation, and closure periods. Impact assessment is a legislated process in more than half of all countries in the world. Through public deliberation and decision-making about proposed major projects, impact assessments are generally mandated to identify and mitigate potential negative impacts to the biophysical environment. The recent development of a new federal system for impact assessments led by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada has extended this mandate in the Canadian context to incorporate positive and negative impacts of projects on health, social, and economic conditions. In the new system, a 180-day planning phase has been introduced to engage with Indigenous peoples and affected communities on their issues of concern, in order to develop a more tailored impact assessment structure for each project. By providing increased opportunities for consultation, engagement, and input from the earliest stages, the planning phase can provide critical pathways to promote population health equity through impact assessments, which help to ensure projects make a net contribution to the public interest and sustainability. The goal of this knowledge synthesis is to prioritize population health equity within federal impact assessment in Canada. Its objectives are to identify key points of leverage in the planning phase for achieving its goals through the implementation of evidence-based best practice and principles. Knowledge mobilization has the aim of promoting the uptake of findings from this research in impact assessment policy and health system practice; advocating for more public health research and practice to support population health equity in the context of major projects; and raising awareness of these issues among the Canadian public. Employing a methodologically rigorous realist review research process, documents were retrieved and screened through an iterative combination of systematically searching two key impact assessment journals, and purposively searching other journals and websites. A total of 185 peer-reviewed and grey literature sources underwent full data extraction, analysis, and synthesis, using a standardized procedure and template. Results include recommendations organized by main themes of findings across five key planning phase processes.