BackgroundThe health of migrants has become an important issue in global health and foreign policy. Assessing the current status of research activity and identifying gaps in global migration health (GMH) is an important step in mapping the evidence-base and on advocating health needs of migrants and mobile populations. The aim of this study was to analyze globally published peer-reviewed literature in GMH.MethodsA bibliometric analysis methodology was used. The Scopus database was used to retrieve documents in peer-reviewed journals in GMH for the study period from 2000 to 2016. A group of experts in GMH developed the needed keywords and validated the final search strategy.ResultsThe number of retrieved documents was 21,457. Approximately one third (6878; 32.1%) of the retrieved documents were published in the last three years of the study period. In total, 5451 (25.4%) documents were about refugees and asylum seekers, while 1328 (6.2%) were about migrant workers, 440 (2.1%) were about international students, 679 (3.2%) were about victims of human trafficking/smuggling, 26 (0.1%) were about patients’ mobility across international borders, and the remaining documents were about unspecified categories of migrants. The majority of the retrieved documents (10,086; 47.0%) were in psychosocial and mental health domain, while 2945 (13.7%) documents were in infectious diseases, 6819 (31.8%) documents were in health policy and systems, 2759 (12.8%) documents were in maternal and reproductive health, and 1918 (8.9%) were in non-communicable diseases. The contribution of authors and institutions in Asian countries, Latin America, Africa, Middle East, and Eastern European countries was low. Literature in GMH represents the perspectives of high-income migrant destination countries.ConclusionOur heat map of research output shows that despite the ever-growing prominence of human mobility across the globe, and Sustainable Development Goals of leaving no one behind, research output on migrants’ health is not consistent with the global migration pattern. A stronger evidence base is needed to enable authorities to make evidence-informed decisions on migration health policy and practice. Research collaboration and networks should be encouraged to prioritize research in GMH.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-5689-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

ImportanceRSV is a common illness among young children that causes significant morbidity and health care costs.ObjectiveRoutinely collected health administrative data can be used to track disease incidence, explore risk factors and conduct health services research. Due to potential for misclassification bias, the accuracy of data-elements should be validated prior to use. The objectives of this study were to validate an algorithm to accurately identify pediatric cases of hospitalized respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) from within Ontario’s health administrative data, estimate annual incidence of hospitalization due to RSV and report the prevalence of major risk factors within hospitalized patients.Study Design and SettingA retrospective chart review was performed to establish a reference-standard cohort of children from the Ottawa region admitted to the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) for RSV-related disease in 2010 and 2011. Chart review data was linked to Ontario’s administrative data and used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of algorithms of RSV-related ICD-10 codes within provincial hospitalization and emergency department databases. Age- and sex-standardized incidence was calculated over time, with trends in incidence assessed using Poisson regression.ResultsFrom a total of 1411 admissions, chart review identified 327 children hospitalized for laboratory confirmed RSV-related disease. Following linkage to administrative data and restriction to first admissions, there were 289 RSV patients in the reference-standard cohort. The best algorithm, based on hospitalization data, resulted in sensitivity 97.9% (95%CI: 95.5–99.2%), specificity 99.6% (95%CI: 98.2–99.8%), PPV 96.9% (95%CI: 94.2–98.6%), NPV 99.4% (95%CI: 99.4–99.9%). Incidence of hospitalized RSV in Ontario from 2005–2012 was 10.2 per 1000 children under 1 year and 4.8 per 1000 children aged 1 to 3 years. During the surveillance period, there was no identifiable increasing or decreasing linear trend in the incidence of hospitalized RSV, hospital length of stay and PICU admission rates. Among the Ontario RSV cohort, 16.3% had one or more major risk factors, with a decreasing trend observed over time.ConclusionChildren hospitalized for RSV-related disease can be accurately identified within population-based health administrative data. RSV is a major public health concern and incidence has not changed over time, suggesting a lack of progress in prevention.

BackgroundChamplain BASE™ (Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation) is a web-based asynchronous electronic communication service that allows primary-care- practitioners (PCPs) to submit “elective” clinical questions to a specialist. For adults, PCPs have reported improved access and timeliness to specialist advice, averted face-to-face specialist referrals in up to 40% of cases and high provider satisfaction.ObjectiveTo determine whether the expansion of eConsult to a pediatric setting would result in similar measures of improved healthcare system process and high provider acceptance reported in adults.DesignProspective observational cohort study.SettingSingle Canadian tertiary-care academic pediatric hospital (June 2014–16) servicing 1.2 million people.Participants1. PCPs already using eConsult. 2.Volunteer pediatric specialists provided services in addition to their regular workload. 3.Pediatric patients (< 18 years-old) referred for none-acute care conditions.Main outcomes and measuresSpecialty service utilization and access, impact on PCP course-of-action and referral-patterns and survey-based provider satisfaction data were collected.Results1064 eConsult requests from 367 PCPs were answered by 23 pediatric specialists representing 14 specialty-services. The top three specialties represented were: General Pediatrics 393 cases (36.9%), Orthopedics 162 (15.2%) and Psychiatry 123 (11.6%). Median specialist response time was 0.9 days (range <1 hour-27 days), most consults (63.2%) required <10minutes to complete and 21/21(100%) specialist survey-respondents reported minimal workload burden. For 515/1064(48.4%) referrals, PCPs received advice for a new or additional course of action; 391/1064(36.7%) referrals resulted in an averted face-to-face specialist visit. In 9 specialties with complete data, the median wait-time was significantly less (p<0.001) for an eConsult (1 day, 95%CI:0.9–1.2) compared with a face-to-face referral (132 days; 95%CI:127–136). The majority (>93.3%) of PCPs rated eConsult as very good/excellent value for both patients and themselves. All specialist survey-respondents indicated eConsult should be a continued service.Conclusions and relevanceSimilar to adults, eConsult improves PCP access and timeliness to elective pediatric specialist advice and influences their care decisions, while reporting high end-user satisfaction. Further study is warranted to assess impact on resource utilization and clinical outcomes.

No abstract

Human papillomavirus is among the most common sexually transmitted infections in the world. Newcomers, defined in Canada as foreign-born individuals who are either immigrants or refugees, but may also include students and undocumented migrants, face numerous barriers to HPV vaccination. This study sought to understand, from the perspective of healthcare providers, barriers and facilitators to HPV vaccination, and recommendations to improve HPV vaccine uptake among newcomers. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 healthcare providers between March and April 2018. Data were analyzed at the manifest level using a Qualitative Content Analysis approach. Categories of barriers to vaccination included: access, communication, knowledge, culture, and provider-related factors. Facilitators included targeted health promotion; understanding the relevance of HPV vaccination; trusting the healthcare system; and cultural sensitivity. Two overarching recommendations were to publicly fund the HPV vaccine, and enhance language- and culturally-appropriate health promotion activities. Further research should explore informational desires and needs from the perspective of newcomers to inform strategies to promote equitable HPV vaccine coverage.

IntroductionThe European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control is developing evidence-based guidance for voluntary screening, treatment and vaccine prevention of infectious diseases for newly arriving migrants to the European Union/European Economic Area. The objective of this systematic review protocol is to guide the identification, appraisal and synthesis of the best available evidence on prevention and assessment of the following priority infectious diseases: tuberculosis, HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, poliomyelitis (polio), Haemophilus influenza disease, strongyloidiasis and schistosomiasis.Methods and analysisThe search strategy will identify evidence from existing systematic reviews and then update the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence using prospective trials, economic evaluations and/or recently published systematic reviews. Interdisciplinary teams have designed logic models to help define study inclusion and exclusion criteria, guiding the search strategy and identifying relevant outcomes. We will assess the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Ethics and disseminationThere are no ethical or safety issues. We anticipate disseminating the findings through open-access publications, conference abstracts and presentations. We plan to publish technical syntheses as GRADEpro evidence summaries and the systematic reviews as part of a special edition open-access publication on refugee health. We are following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols reporting guideline. This protocol is registered in PROSPERO: CRD42016045798.

No abstract