BackgroundMembership in diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural groups is often associated with inequitable health and mental health outcomes for diverse populations. Yet, little is known about how cultural adaptations of standard services affect health and mental health outcomes for service recipients. This systematic review identified extant themes in the research regarding cultural adaptations across a broad range of health and mental health services and synthesized the most rigorous experimental research available to isolate and evaluate potential efficacy gains of cultural adaptations to service delivery.MethodsMEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, and grey literature sources were searched for English-language studies published between January 1955 and January 2015. Cultural adaptations to any aspect of a service delivery were considered. Outcomes of interest included changes in service provider behavior or changes in the behavioral, medical, or self-reported experience of recipients.ResultsThirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The most frequently tested adaptation occurred in preventive services and consisted of modifying the content of materials or services delivered. None of the included studies focused on making changes in the provider’s behavior. Many different populations were studied but most research was concerned with the experiences and outcomes of African Americans. Seventeen of the 31 retained studies observed at least one significant effect in favor of a culturally adapted service. However there were also findings that favored the control group or showed no difference. Researchers did not find consistent evidence supporting implementation of any specific type of adaptation nor increased efficacy with any particular cultural group.ConclusionsConceptual frameworks to classify cultural adaptations and their resultant health/mental health outcomes were developed and applied in a variety of ways. This review synthesizes the most rigorous research in the field and identifies implications for policy, practice, and research, including individualization, cost considerations, and patient or client satisfaction, among others.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1953-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Considering the recent COVID‐19 pandemic, we recognised a lack of synthesis amongst the available literature pertaining to the intersections of homelessness and pandemic response and planning. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to identify relevant peer‐reviewed literature in this area to thematically produce evidence‐based recommendations that would inform community planning and response amongst homeless populations. Although this review is inspired by the COVID‐19 pandemic, our intention was to produce relevant recommendations to for all current and future outbreaks and pandemics more generally. Our search criteria focused on pandemics and rapid‐spread illnesses such as contagious respiratory diseases with contact spread and with an emphasis on individuals experiencing homelessness. Content analysis methods were followed to extract and thematically synthesise key information amongst the 223 articles that matched our search criteria between the years of 1984 and 2020. Two reviewers were assigned to the screening process and used Covidence and undertook two rounds of discussion to identify and finalise themes for extraction. This review illustrates that the current breadth of academic literature on homeless populations has thus far focused on tuberculosis (TB) rather than diseases that are more recent and closely related to COVID‐19—such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) or H1N1. Our thematic content analysis revealed six themes that offer tangible and scalable recommendations which include (1) education and outreach, (2) adapting structure of services, (3) screening and contract tracing, (4) transmission and prevention strategies, (5) shelter protocols and (6) treatment, adherence and vaccination. The breadth and depth of reviews such as these are dependent on the quantity and quality of the available literature. Therefore, the limited existing literature outside of tuberculosis specific to homelessness in this review illustrates a need for more academic research into the intersections of pandemics and homelessness—particularly for evaluations of response and planning. Nonetheless, this review offers timely considerations for pandemic response and planning amongst homeless populations during the current COVID‐19 pandemic and can facilitate future research in this area.
This exploratory study sought to uncover service provider perspectives on the early response to COVID-19 in a small community in an advanced industrialized country - the homelessness support sector of the Central Okanagan, British Columbia. Following a case study approach, snowball sampling was utilized in May and June 2020 to achieve a sample size of 30 through a mix of one-on-one interviews and open-ended surveys. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to uncover commonalities among interview responses. Common themes are discussed in relation to three areas of questioning including challenges, successes, and mitigations/areas for future support. While the community came together to support the response, there were challenges and concerns regarding safety and personal protective equipment supplies, social distancing and knowledge transmission within the homeless community, access to food and water, and lack of space for isolating positive cases. The findings illustrate possible research, practice, public health policy, and emergency planning considerations within smaller communities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.