An updated scoping review of migrant health research in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: One in five people living in Ireland is a migrant. Understanding the distinctive health needs of this diverse population is essential to provide evidence-based, culturally sensitive primary care services. The aim of this review is to systematically examine changes in migrant health research in Ireland and to inform research, policy and practice in the field. METHODS: To update a 2017 scoping review of migrant health research in Ireland, we used Arksey and O'Malley's framework, updates by Colquhoun and Peters and the PRISMA-ScR from the Joanna Briggs Institute to search 10 databases covering May 2017 - March 2023. Findings were analysed using the World Health Organisation Strategy and Action Plan for Refugee and Migrant Health 2016-2023, which identifies 9 priority strategic areas (SA). Findings were compared with the 2017 review. RESULTS: 62 papers were identified. There has been an increase in studies over time from an average of five per year in the previous review to an average of 10 per year in this review. There is growing interest in research about SA1: Collaborative action on migrant health issues and SA2: Advocacy for the right to health of refugees and migrants - evidenced by an increase of 13% in this review. Similarly to 2017, the majority of papers align with three of the nine WHO Strategic Areas; SA3: Addressing the social determinants of health (24%), SA4: Achieving public health preparedness (29%) and SA5: Strengthening health systems (26%). The volume of research on SA6: Communicable diseases (11%) and SA7: Noncommunicable diseases (19%) remains stable however research on SA8: Health screening and assessment (5%) and SA9: Improving health information and communication (2%) remains low. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in the volume of research on migrant health in Ireland is notable. The analysis over time illuminates changes in the focus of research studies. Gaps in research about screening, assessment and health information warrant particular attention. It is also necessary to continue paying attention to areas of recent growth and stagnation for a balanced and comprehensive evidence base. Mobilising resources to continue this increase is needed for evidence-based policy and practice.

Which diabetes specific patient reported outcomes should be measured in routine care? A systematic review to inform a core outcome set for adults with Type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus: The European Health Outcomes Observatory (H2O) programme.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to identify candidate patient reported outcomes with potential to inform individual patient care and service development for inclusion in a digital outcome set to be collected in routine care, as part of an international project to enhance care outcomes for people with diabetes. METHODS: PubMed, COSMIN and COMET databases were searched. Published studies were included if they recommended patient reported outcomes that were clinically useful and/or important to people with diabetes. To aid selection decisions, recommended outcomes were considered in terms of the evidence endorsing them and their importance to people with diabetes. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies recommending 53 diabetes specific outcomes, and patient reported outcome measures, were included. The outcomes reflected the experience of living with diabetes (e.g. psychological well-being, symptom experience, health beliefs and stigma) and behaviours (e.g. self-management). Diabetes distress and self-management behaviours were most endorsed by the evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The review provides a comprehensive list of candidate outcomes endorsed by international evidence and informed by existing outcome sets, and suggestions for measures. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The review offers evidence to guide clinical application. Integrated measurement of these outcomes in care settings holds enormous potential to improve provision of care and outcomes in diabetes.

'Falling off the radar' of public health: The case of uninsured Chinese patients in Vienna, Austria.

In public health policy debates, the 2015-2016 refugee crisis made visible that even in European welfare states with (close to) universal health coverage there are specific vulnerable groups with highly limited access to health care. Among them is a population of so-called 'undocumented' or 'irregular' migrants who have no regular status of residence and falls off the radar of publicly funded health care services and thus from the public health surveillance systems. The aim of our study is to provide the first-of-its-kind evidence on the characteristics, health problems and health care needs of one such vulnerable group in Austria - Chinese migrants residing in Vienna without a regular status. Medical records of 74 uninsured assumingly undocumented Chinese patients were analysed. The data was provided by a Non-governmental organisation (NGO) which delivers primary care to uninsured people in Vienna. The most frequently diagnosed health problems clustered around cardiovascular and metabolic-related diseases (hypertension and diabetics) and there was a high burden of multiple chorionic non-communicable diseases. Further efforts and resources are needed for collecting more data in a systematic way. A trusting relationship between science and practice and a cooperative relationship between and among the government agencies and NGOs are essential for evidence-based public health policy making.