Background Without inclusion of diverse research participants, it is challenging to understand how study findings will translate into the real world. Despite this, a lack of inclusion of those from under-served groups in research is a prevailing problem due to multi-faceted barriers acting at multiple levels. Therefore, we rapidly reviewed international published literature, in relation to clinical trials, on barriers relating to inclusion, and evidence of approaches that are effective in overcoming these. Methods A rapid literature review was conducted searching PubMed for peer-reviewed articles that discussed barriers to inclusion or strategies to improve inclusion in clinical trial research published between 2010 and 2021. Grey literature articles were excluded. Results Seventy-two eligible articles were included. The main barriers identified were language and communication, lack of trust, access to trials, eligibility criteria, attitudes and beliefs, lack of knowledge around clinical trials, and logistical and practical issues. In relation to evidence-based strategies and enablers, two key themes arose: [1] a multi-faceted approach is essential [2]; no single strategy was universally effective either within or between trials. The key evidence-based strategies identified were cultural competency training, community partnerships, personalised approach, multilingual materials and staff, communication-specific strategies, increasing understanding and trust, and tackling logistical barriers. Conclusions Many of the barriers relating to inclusion are the same as those that impact trial design and healthcare delivery generally. However, the presentation of these barriers among different under-served groups may be unique to each population’s particular circumstances, background, and needs. Based on the literature, we make 15 recommendations that, if implemented, may help improve inclusion within clinical trials and clinical research more generally. The three main recommendations include improving cultural competency and sensitivity of all clinical trial staff through training and ongoing personal development, the need to establish a diverse community advisory panel for ongoing input into the research process, and increasing recruitment of staff from under-served groups. Implementation of these recommendations may help improve representation of under-served groups in clinical trials which would improve the external validity of associated findings.

No abstract

No abstract

Exposure to indoor air pollution increases the risk of pneumonia in children, accounting for about a million deaths globally. This study investigates the individual effect of solid fuel, carbon monoxide (CO), black carbon (BC) and particulate matter (PM) 2.5 on pneumonia in children under 5 in low- and middle-income countries. A systematic review was conducted to identify peer-reviewed and grey full-text documents without restrictions to study design, language or year of publication using nine databases (Embase, PubMed, EBSCO/CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, WHO Library Database (WHOLIS), Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)-WHO and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Exposure to solid fuel use showed a significant association to childhood pneumonia. Exposure to CO showed no association to childhood pneumonia. PM 2.5 did not show any association when physically measured, whilst eight studies that used solid fuel as a proxy for PM 2.5 all reported significant associations. This review highlights the need to standardise measurement of exposure and outcome variables when investigating the effect of air pollution on pneumonia in children under 5. Future studies should account for BC, PM 1 and the interaction between indoor and outdoor pollution and its cumulative impact on childhood pneumonia.

No abstract

Background: Conflict and violent crises have resulted in over 40 million of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Most affected regions lack access to basic health resources and generally rely on humanitarian support. The objective of this review was to appraise primary health service interventions among conflict-induced internally displaced populations in low and middle income countries between 2000 and 2019. Methods: A systematic review of literature in the following databases: Embase, MEDLINE, PsyArticles, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, LILAC and CAB Articles, was performed to identify interventions implemented in conflict IDP settings. Results: Initial searches yielded 4578 papers and 30 studies met the inclusion criteria. Descriptivesynthesis analysis was used, and the final selections were assessed using a customized CriticalAppraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. Included papers were from Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and the Middle East regions. Most studies were on prevention interventions, especially water treatment and maternal health. Treatment interventions mostly focused on onmalaria and mental health. Only one food and nutrition study with outcome data was identified, indicating limitations in IDP health-related intervention publications. Reported interventions were conducted between one week to five years, and the study qualities were moderate. The most effective interventions were integrated programmes and common challenges were weakstudy methodology and data reporting. Conclusion: Regardless of the intervention types and durations, the services offered were beneficial to the IDPs. More intervention evidence are, however required as shown in gaps around food and nutrition, health education and disease surveillance.

Background:Nigeria has a high population density but a weak health-care system. To improve the quality of care, 3 organizations carried out a quality improvement pilot intervention at the primary health-care level in selected rural areas.Objective:To assess the change in quality of care in primary health-care facilities in rural Nigeria following the provision of technical governance support and to document the successes and challenges encountered.Method:A total of 6 states were selected across the 6 geopolitical zones of the country. However, assessments were carried out in 40 facilities in only 5 states. Selection was based on location, coverage, and minimum services offered. The facilities were divided randomly into 2 groups. The treatment group received quality-of-care assessment, continuous feedback, and improvement support, whereas the control group received quality assessment and no other support. Data were collected using the SafeCare Healthcare Standards and managed on the SafeCare Data Management System—AfriDB. Eight core areas were assessed at baseline and end line, and compliance to quality health-care standards was compared.Result:Outcomes from 40 facilities were accepted and analyzed. Overall scores increased in the treatment facilities compared to the control facilities, with strong evidence of improvement (t = 5.28, P = .0004) and 11% average improvement, but no clear pattern of improvement emerged in the control group.Conclusion:The study demonstrated governance support and active community involvement offered potential for quality improvement in primary health-care facilities.

Inequality in distribution of humanitarian support was observed across different settings, which could lead to a higher likelihood of water, food and air-related diseases and thereby, a poorer quality of life for IDPs. Ensuring standardized health assessments could promote a more even distribution of resources across IDP locations.