The effectiveness of ethno-specific and mainstream health services: an evidence gap map

Author:

Vergani Matteo,Mansouri Fethi,Weng Enqi,Rajkobal Praveena

Abstract

Abstract Background People of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) background face significant barriers in accessing effective health services in multicultural countries such as the United States, Canada, Europe and Australia. To address these barriers, government and nongovernment organisations globally have taken the approach of creating ethno-specific services, which cater to the specific needs of CALD clients. These services are often complementary to mainstream services, which cater to the general population including CALD communities. Methods This systematic review uses the Evidence Gap Map (EGM) approach to map the available evidence on the effectiveness of ethno-specific and mainstream services in the Australian context. We reviewed Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed databases for articles published from 1996 to 2021 that assessed the impact of health services for Australian CALD communities. Two independent reviewers extracted and coded all the documents, and discussed discrepancies until reaching a 100% agreement. The main inclusion criteria were: 1) time (published after 1996); 2) geography (data collected in Australia); 3) document type (presents results of empirical research in a peer-reviewed outlet); 4) scope (assesses the effectiveness of a health service on CALD communities). We identified 97 articles relevant for review. Results Ninety-six percent of ethno-specific services (i.e. specifically targeting CALD groups) were effective in achieving their aims across various outcomes. Eighteen percent of mainstream services (i.e. targeting the general population) were effective for CALD communities. When disaggregating our sample by outcomes (i.e. access, satisfaction with the service, health and literacy), we found that 50 % of studies looking at mainstream services’ impact on CALD communities found that they were effective in achieving health outcomes. The use of sub-optimal methodologies that increase the risk of biased findings is widespread in the research field that we mapped. Conclusions Our findings provide partial support to the claims of advocacy stakeholders that mainstream services have limitations in the provision of effective health services for CALD communities. Although focusing on the Australian case study, this review highlights an under-researched policy area, proposes a viable methodology to conduct further research on this topic, and points to the need to disaggregate the data by outcome (i.e. access, satisfaction with the service, health and literacy) when assessing the comparative effectiveness of ethno-specific and mainstream services for multicultural communities.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Health Policy

Reference50 articles.

1. Marc, A. New frontiers of social policy: delivering services in multicultural societies. 2010. Accessed 1 Sept 2021. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/2403/527070PUB0serv101Official0Use0Only1.pdf?sequence=1

2. Malatzky C, Nixon R, Mitchell O, Bourke L. Prioritising the cultural inclusivity of a rural mainstream health service for first nation Australians: an analysis of discourse and power. Health Sociol Rev. 2018;27(3):248–62.

3. Collett E, Petrovic M. The future of immigrant integration in Europe: mainstreaming approaches for inclusion. 2014. Accessed 1 Sept 2021. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/future-immigrant-integration-europe-mainstreaming-approaches-inclusion

4. FECCA. Multicultural access and equity: strengthening connections between communities and services. 2013. Accessed 7 May 2018. http://www.fecca.org.au/images/stories/documents/Submissions/2013/fecca_multicultural_access_equity_report_june2013.pdf

5. Radermacher H, Feldman S, Browning C. Mainstream versus ethno-specific community aged care services: it's not an ‘either or’. Aust J Ageing. 2009;28(2):58–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6612.2008.00342.x.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3