Sathe Nila A, Ovelman Colleen, Ospina Naykky Singh, Dewidar Omar, Terhune Elizabeth A, Francis Damian K, Welch Vivian, Heyn Patricia C, Duque Tiffany, Viswanathan Meera
RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA; RTI International-University of North Carolina Evidence-Based Practice Center US Cochrane Affiliate, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA; RTI International-University of North Carolina Evidence-Based Practice Center US Cochrane Affiliate, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA; Evidence Production and Methods Directorate, Central Editorial Service, Cochrane, London, UK.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Dec;176:111575. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111575. Epub 2024 Oct 21.
To inform methods for centering racial health equity in syntheses, we explored (1) how syntheses that assess health-related interventions and explicitly address racial health inequities have engaged interest holders and (2) guidance for engaging racially and ethnically diverse interest holders.
We systematically identified evidence syntheses (searches limited to January 1, 2020, through January 25, 2023) and guidance documents (no search date limits) for this overview. From syntheses we extracted data on engagement rationale and processes and extracted approaches suggested from guidance documents. We summarized findings qualitatively.
Twenty-nine of the 157 (18%) eligible syntheses reported using engagement. Syntheses typically lacked robust detail on why and how to use and structure engagement and outcomes/effects of engagement, though syntheses involving Indigenous populations typically included more detail. When reported, engagement typically occurred in early and later synthesis phases. We did not identify guidance documents that specifically intended to provide guidance for engaging racially/ethnically diverse individuals in syntheses; some related guidance described broader equity considerations or engagement in general.
This review highlights gaps in understanding of the use of engagement in racial health equity-focused syntheses and in guidance specifically addressing engaging racially and ethnically diverse populations. Syntheses and guidance materials we identified reported limited data addressing the whys, hows, and whats (ie, rationale for, approaches to, resources needed and effects of) of engagement, and we lack information for understanding whether engagement makes a difference to the conduct and findings of syntheses and when and how engagement of specific populations may contribute to centering racial health equity. A more informed understanding of these issues, facilitated by prospective and retrospective descriptions of engagement of diverse interest holders, may help advance actionable guidance and reviews.
We identified evidence syntheses (a kind of research that identifies and summarizes findings of individual studies or publications to address research questions) that looked at studies of interventions to improve differences in effects on health for racial or ethnic populations to see (1) if and how they incorporated perspectives of interest holders, people with an interest in the subject being studied; (2) what guidance for how to engage or involve racially or ethnically diverse interest holders exists. We found that 29 of 157 syntheses addressing interventions to improve differences in effects on health reported involving interest holders but typically did not provide much detail about how to involve people. Syntheses that involved Indigenous people usually had more information, but overall, the syntheses did not have much information about how to involve people and what the impact of involving them may be. We did not find guidance information that specifically set out to provide information about engaging racially/ethnically diverse individuals in syntheses; some related guidance described considerations about involving people in syntheses in general. This review highlights gaps in understanding of how to engage people in racial health equity-focused syntheses and in guidance specifically addressing engaging racially and ethnically diverse populations. Syntheses and guidance materials we identified reported limited information about whys, hows, and whats (ie, reasons to use, how to do, and resources needed and effects of) related to engagement, and we lack information to help understand whether engagement makes a difference in doing syntheses and when and how engagement of specific populations may help to address racial health equity.
为了介绍在综合研究中以种族健康公平为核心的方法,我们探讨了:(1)评估与健康相关干预措施并明确解决种族健康不平等问题的综合研究是如何让利益相关者参与进来的;(2)关于让不同种族和族裔的利益相关者参与进来的指导意见。
我们系统地确定了本次综述的证据综合研究(搜索范围限于2020年1月1日至2023年1月25日)和指导文件(无搜索日期限制)。从综合研究中,我们提取了关于参与的基本原理和过程的数据,以及从指导文件中提取的建议方法。我们对研究结果进行了定性总结。
157项符合条件的综合研究中有29项(18%)报告使用了利益相关者参与。综合研究通常缺乏关于为何以及如何使用和构建参与以及参与的结果/效果的详细有力信息,不过涉及原住民群体的综合研究通常包含更多细节。当有报告时,参与通常发生在综合研究的早期和后期阶段。我们没有找到专门旨在为让不同种族/族裔的个人参与综合研究提供指导的指导文件;一些相关指导描述了更广泛的公平考虑因素或一般的参与情况。
本综述突出了在以种族健康公平为重点的综合研究中对参与使用的理解方面的差距,以及在专门针对让不同种族和族裔群体参与的指导方面的差距。我们确定的综合研究和指导材料报告了关于参与的原因、方式和内容(即参与的基本原理、方法、所需资源和效果)的数据有限,而且我们缺乏信息来了解参与是否会对综合研究及其结果产生影响,以及特定群体的参与何时以及如何有助于以种族健康公平为核心。
我们确定了一些证据综合研究(一种通过识别和总结个体研究或出版物的结果来解决研究问题的研究类型),这些研究关注旨在改善种族或族裔群体健康影响差异的干预措施研究,以了解:(1)它们是否以及如何纳入了利益相关者(对所研究主题感兴趣的人)的观点;(2)关于如何让不同种族或族裔的利益相关者参与进来有哪些指导意见。我们发现,在157项针对改善健康影响差异的干预措施的综合研究中,有29项报告让利益相关者参与了,但通常没有提供太多关于如何让人们参与的细节。涉及原住民的综合研究通常有更多信息,但总体而言,综合研究没有太多关于如何让人们参与以及让他们参与可能产生什么影响的信息。我们没有找到专门阐述如何让不同种族/族裔的个人参与综合研究的指导信息;一些相关指导描述了一般情况下让人们参与综合研究的考虑因素。本综述突出了在理解如何让人们参与以种族健康公平为重点的综合研究以及专门针对让不同种族和族裔群体参与的指导方面的差距。我们确定的综合研究和指导材料报告了与参与相关的原因、方式和内容(即使用的理由、如何做、所需资源和效果)的信息有限,而且我们缺乏信息来帮助了解参与是否会对进行综合研究产生影响,以及特定群体的参与何时以及如何有助于解决种族健康公平问题。