BackgroundConventional systematic review techniques have limitations when the aim of a review is to construct a critical analysis of a complex body of literature. This article offers a reflexive account of an attempt to conduct an interpretive review of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups in the UKMethodsThis project involved the development and use of the method of Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS). This approach is sensitised to the processes of conventional systematic review methodology and draws on recent advances in methods for interpretive synthesis.ResultsMany analyses of equity of access have rested on measures of utilisation of health services, but these are problematic both methodologically and conceptually. A more useful means of understanding access is offered by the synthetic construct of candidacy. Candidacy describes how people's eligibility for healthcare is determined between themselves and health services. It is a continually negotiated property of individuals, subject to multiple influences arising both from people and their social contexts and from macro-level influences on allocation of resources and configuration of services. Health services are continually constituting and seeking to define the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention, while at the same time people are engaged in constituting and defining what they understand to be the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention. Access represents a dynamic interplay between these simultaneous, iterative and mutually reinforcing processes. By attending to how vulnerabilities arise in relation to candidacy, the phenomenon of access can be better understood, and more appropriate recommendations made for policy, practice and future research.DiscussionBy innovating with existing methods for interpretive synthesis, it was possible to produce not only new methods for conducting what we have termed critical interpretive synthesis, but also a new theoretical conceptualisation of access to healthcare. This theoretical account of access is distinct from models already extant in the literature, and is the result of combining diverse constructs and evidence into a coherent whole. Both the method and the model should be evaluated in other contexts.

No abstract

Summary Background Stillbirths are a major public health issue and a sensitive marker of the quality of care around pregnancy and birth. The UN Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and Adolescents’ Health (2016–30) and the Every Newborn Action Plan (led by UNICEF and WHO) call for an end to preventable stillbirths. A first step to prevent stillbirths is obtaining standardised measurement of stillbirth rates across countries. We estimated stillbirth rates and their trends for 195 countries from 2000 to 2019 and assessed progress over time. Methods For a systematic assessment, we created a dataset of 2833 country-year datapoints from 171 countries relevant to stillbirth rates, including data from registration and health information systems, household-based surveys, and population-based studies. After data quality assessment and exclusions, we used 1531 datapoints to estimate country-specific stillbirth rates for 195 countries from 2000 to 2019 using a Bayesian hierarchical temporal sparse regression model, according to a definition of stillbirth of at least 28 weeks’ gestational age. Our model combined covariates with a temporal smoothing process such that estimates were informed by data for country-periods with high quality data, while being based on covariates for country-periods with little or no data on stillbirth rates. Bias and additional uncertainty associated with observations based on alternative stillbirth definitions and source types, and observations that were subject to non-sampling errors, were included in the model. We compared the estimated stillbirth rates and trends to previously reported mortality estimates in children younger than 5 years. Findings Globally in 2019, an estimated 2·0 million babies (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 1·9–2·2) were stillborn at 28 weeks or more of gestation, with a global stillbirth rate of 13·9 stillbirths (90% UI 13·5–15·4) per 1000 total births. Stillbirth rates in 2019 varied widely across regions, from 22·8 stillbirths (19·8–27·7) per 1000 total births in west and central Africa to 2·9 (2·7–3·0) in western Europe. After west and central Africa, eastern and southern Africa and south Asia had the second and third highest stillbirth rates in 2019. The global annual rate of reduction in stillbirth rate was estimated at 2·3% (90% UI 1·7–2·7) from 2000 to 2019, which was lower than the 2·9% (2·5–3·2) annual rate of reduction in neonatal mortality rate (for neonates aged <28 days) and the 4·3% (3·8–4·7) annual rate of reduction in mortality rate among children aged 1–59 months during the same period. Based on the lower bound of the 90% UIs, 114 countries had an estimated decrease in stillbirth rate since 2000, with four countries having a decrease of at least 50·0%, 28 having a decrease of 25·0–49·9%, 50 having a decrease of 10·0–24·9%, and 32 having a decrease of less than 10·0%. For the remaining 81 countries, we found no decrease in stillbirth rate since 2000. Of these countries...

Aims: To investigate the extent of socioeconomic inequalities in the incidence of very preterm birth over the past decade. Methods: Ecological study of all 549 618 births in the former Trent health region, UK, from 1 January 1994 to 31 December 2003. All singleton births of 22 +0 to 32 +6 weeks gestation (7 185 births) were identified from population surveys of neonatal services and stillbirths. Poisson regression was used to calculate incidence of very preterm birth (22-32 weeks) and extremely preterm birth (22-28 weeks) by year of birth and decile of deprivation (child poverty section of the Index of Multiple Deprivation). Results: Incidence of very preterm singleton birth rose from 11.9 per 1000 births in 1994 to 13.7 per 1000 births in 2003. Those from the most deprived decile were at nearly twice the risk of very preterm birth compared with those from the least deprived decile, with 16.4 per 1000 births in the most deprived decile compared with 8.5 per 1000 births in the least deprived decile (incidence rate ratio 1.94; 95% CI (1.73 to 2.17)). This deprivation gap remained unchanged throughout the 10-year period. The magnitude of socioeconomic inequalities was the same for extremely preterm births (22-28 weeks incidence rate ratio 1.94; 95% CI (1.62 to 2.32)). Conclusions: This large, unique dataset of very preterm births shows wide socio-economic inequalities that persist over time. These findings are likely to have consequences on the burden of long-term morbidity. Our research can assist future healthcare planning, the monitoring of socio-economic inequalities and the targeting of interventions in order to reduce this persistent deprivation gap.

No abstract

The relatively high SMRs observed in young people and in women, particularly those living in inner city areas and with Down syndrome, deserve further investigation for possible explanations, including socio-economic factors.

The outcome of treatment for amblyopia and the factors that affect this are not well understood. A major reason for this has been the exclusion from previous large studies of a sometimes unknown number of patients because of failure to comply with treatment. This paper analyses the outcome of amblyopia treatment in a retrospective review of the orthoptic records of a cohort of 961 children treated for amblyopia at seven centres who first attended in 1983. The final visual acuity was recorded by Snellen or matching methods in 894 children (93%). Of these, 48% achieved 6/9 or better, 35% less than 6/9 but better than or equal to 6/18, and 17% achieved less than 6/18. The outcome was best for pure anisometropic amblyopia, intermediate for pure strabismic amblyopia and least good for mixed strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia with a final visual acuity of 6/10.2, 6/12.8 and 6/14.8 respectively. While the age at start of treatment did not correlate with final visual acuity both poor initial visual acuity and poor compliance were associated with poor outcome. The main factor affecting the outcome of amblyopia treatment is the initial visual acuity. Comparison with the literature suggests that the results of treatment in this country may be falling far short of what would be possible in ideal circumstances with unlimited resources.

ObjectiveTo describe neonatal outcomes and explore variation in delivery of care for infants born late (34–36  weeks) and moderately (32–33 weeks) preterm (LMPT).Design/settingProspective population-based study comprising births in four major maternity centres, one midwifery-led unit and at home between September 2009 and December 2010. Data were obtained from maternal and neonatal records.ParticipantsAll LMPT infants were eligible. A random sample of term-born infants (≥37 weeks) acted as controls.Outcome measuresNeonatal unit (NNU) admission, respiratory and nutritional support, neonatal morbidities, investigations, length of stay and postnatal ward care were measured. Differences between centres were explored.Results1146 (83%) LMPT and 1258 (79% of eligible) term-born infants were recruited. LMPT infants were significantly more likely to receive resuscitation at birth (17.5% vs 7.4%), respiratory (11.8% vs 0.9%) and nutritional support (3.5% vs 0.3%) and were less likely to be fed breast milk (64.2% vs 72.2%) than term infants. For all interventions and morbidities, a gradient of increasing risk with decreasing gestation was evident. Although 60% of late preterm infants were never admitted to a NNU, 83% required medical input on postnatal wards. Clinical management differed significantly between services.ConclusionsLMPT infants place high demands on specialist neonatal services. A substantial amount of previously unreported specialist input is provided in postnatal wards, beyond normal newborn care. Appropriate expertise and planning of early care are essential if such infants are managed away from specialised neonatal settings. Further research is required to clarify optimal and cost-effective postnatal management for LMPT babies.