Counting what counts: a systematic scoping review of instruments used in primary healthcare services to measure the wellbeing of Indigenous children and youth.

BACKGROUND: Primary healthcare services have principal responsibility for providing child and youth wellbeing and mental health services, but have lacked appropriate measurement instruments to assess the wellbeing of Indigenous children and youth or to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and services designed to meet their needs. This review assesses the availability and characteristics of measurement instruments that have been applied in primary healthcare services in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States (CANZUS countries) to assess the wellbeing of Indigenous children and youth. METHODS: Fifteen databases and 12 websites were searched in December 2017 and again in October 2021. Pre-defined search terms pertained to Indigenous children and youth, CANZUS country names, and wellbeing or mental health measures. PRISMA guidelines were followed, with eligibility criteria guiding screening of titles and abstracts, and selected full-text papers. Results are presented based on the characteristics of documented measurement instruments assessed according to five desirability criteria: development for Indigenous youth populations, adherence to relational strength-based constructs, administration by child and or youth self-report, reliability and validity, and usefulness for identifying wellbeing or risk levels. RESULTS: Twenty-one publications were found that described the development and or use by primary healthcare services of 14 measurement instruments, employed across 30 applications. Four of the 14 measurement instruments were developed specifically for Indigenous youth populations, four focused solely on strength-based wellbeing concepts but none included all Indigenous wellbeing domains. CONCLUSION: There is a diversity of measurement instruments available, but few fit our desirability criteria. Although it is possible that we missed relevant papers and reports, this review clearly supports the need for further research to develop, refine or adapt instruments cross-culturally to measure the wellbeing of Indigenous children and youth.

Gram-negative neonatal sepsis in low- and lower-middle-income countries and WHO empirical antibiotic recommendations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal sepsis is a significant global health issue associated with marked regional disparities in mortality. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing concern in Gram-negative organisms, which increasingly predominate in neonatal sepsis, and existing WHO empirical antibiotic recommendations may no longer be appropriate. Previous systematic reviews have been limited to specific low- and middle-income countries. We therefore completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of available data from all low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs) since 2010, with a focus on regional differences in Gram-negative infections and AMR. METHODS AND FINDINGS: All studies published from 1 January 2010 to 21 April 2021 about microbiologically confirmed bloodstream infections or meningitis in neonates and AMR in LLMICs were assessed for eligibility. Small case series, studies with a small number of Gram-negative isolates (<10), and studies with a majority of isolates prior to 2010 were excluded. Main outcomes were pooled proportions of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella, Enterobacter, Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter and AMR. We included 88 studies (4 cohort studies, 3 randomised controlled studies, and 81 cross-sectional studies) comprising 10,458 Gram-negative isolates from 19 LLMICs. No studies were identified outside of Africa and Asia. The estimated pooled proportion of neonatal sepsis caused by Gram-negative organisms was 60% (95% CI 55% to 65%). Klebsiella spp. was the most common, with a pooled proportion of 38% of Gram-negative sepsis (95% CI 33% to 43%). Regional differences were observed, with higher proportions of Acinetobacter spp. in Asia and Klebsiella spp. in Africa. Resistance to aminoglycosides and third-generation cephalosporins ranged from 42% to 69% and from 59% to 84%, respectively. Study limitations include significant heterogeneity among included studies, exclusion of upper-middle-income countries, and potential sampling bias, with the majority of studies from tertiary hospital settings, which may overestimate the burden caused by Gram-negative bacteria. CONCLUSIONS: Gram-negative bacteria are an important cause of neonatal sepsis in LLMICs and are associated with significant rates of resistance to WHO-recommended first- and second-line empirical antibiotics. AMR surveillance should underpin region-specific empirical treatment recommendations. Meanwhile, a significant global commitment to accessible and effective antimicrobials for neonates is required.