Explore the vast range of titles available.

Technical and vocational education and training (TVET) has attracted wide attention with its potential to alleviate poverty and improve youth employment in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, no agreement has been reached on its impact on participants’ wellbeing and livelihoods. Most previous reviews were restricted to economic and employment-related outcomes through statistical meta-analyses and failed to examine participants’ comprehensive experiences. This systematic review investigated young people’s learning process and consequences of TVET participation in LMICs by reviewing qualitative evidence across 31 published and unpublished studies from 2000 to 2019. Adopting a framework thematic synthesis approach, this study revealed that TVET participation had a multi-dimensional impact on young people’s cultural capital (skills and knowledge, credentials and socio-emotional competencies), social capital (bonding, bridging and linking social relationships), aspirations, and health, beyond economic consequences. Participants’ mixed experiences were collectively shaped by multiple factors, including intervention features, intervention quality (curriculum and content, instructor and instruction, administration and management), learning environment (physical environment, instructor-learner relationship and peer relationship), individual characteristics, and social norms. Findings also indicated that disadvantaged youth particularly benefitted from TVET participation, which highlighted the potential of TVET to improve education access and equity. A framework was distilled from evidence synthesis to inform future research and practice that aim to design, implement and evaluate TVET in a way to enhance young people’s overall wellbeing in the developing context.

Websites and online resources outside academic bibliographic databases can be significant sources for identifying literature, though there are challenges in searching and managing the results. These are pertinent to systematic reviews that are underpinned by principles of transparency, accountability and reproducibility. We consider how the conduct of searching these resources can be compatible with the principles of a systematic search. We present an approach to address some of the challenges. This is particularly relevant when websites are relied upon to identify important literature for a review. We recommend considering the process as three stages and having a considered rationale and sufficient recordkeeping at each stage that balances transparency with practicality of purpose. Advances in technology and recommendations for website providers are briefly discussed.

Background.Humanitarian emergencies can impact people's psychosocial well-being and mental health. Providing mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) is an essential component of humanitarian aid responses. However, factors influencing the delivery MHPSS programmes have yet to be synthesised. We undertook a systematic review on the barriers to, and facilitators of, implementing and receiving MHPSS programmes delivered to populations affected by humanitarian emergencies in low- and middle-income countries.Methods.A comprehensive search of 12 bibliographic databases, 25 websites and citation checking was undertaken. Studies published in English from 1980 onwards were included if they contained evidence on the perspectives of adults or children who had engaged in or programmes providers involved in delivering, MHPSS programmes in humanitarian settings. Thirteen studies were critically appraised and analysed thematically.Results.Community engagement was a key mechanism to support the successful implementation and uptake of MHPSS programmes. Establishing good relationships with parents may also be important when there is a need to communicate the value of children and young people's participation in programmes. Sufficient numbers of trained providers were essential in ensuring a range of MHPSS programmes were delivered as planned but could be challenging in resource-limited settings. Programmes need to be socially and culturally meaningful to ensure they remain appealing. Recipients also valued engagement with peers in group-based programmes and trusting and supportive relationships with providers.Conclusion.The synthesis identified important factors that could improve MHPSS programme reach and appeal. Taking these factors into consideration could support future MHPSS programmes achieve their intended aims.

BackgroundHumanitarian emergencies are a major global health challenge with the potential to have a profound impact on people’s mental and psychological health. Effective interventions in humanitarian settings are needed to support the mental health and psychosocial needs of affected populations. To fill this gap, this systematic review synthesises evidence on the effectiveness of a wide range of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programmes delivered to adults affected by humanitarian emergencies in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsA comprehensive search of 12 electronic databases, key websites and citation checking was undertaken in 2015 and updated in May 2018. We included controlled trials published in English from 1980. We extracted data and assessed risk of bias prior to performing a meta-analysis using random effects models. When meta-analysis was not used, we narratively described individual trial effect sizes using forest plots.ResultsThirty-five studies were included. Overall, MHPSS programmes show benefits in improved functioning and reducing post-traumatic stress disorder. There are also indications from a limited pool of evidence that cognitive–behavioural therapy and narrative exposure therapy may improve mental health conditions. Other psychotherapy modalities also showed a positive trend in favour of MHPSS programmes for improving several mental health outcomes.ConclusionIn addition to MHPSS programme for improving mental health outcomes in adults affected by humanitarian emergencies in LMICs, there is also a need to generate robust evidence to identify potential impact on broader social dimensions. Doing so could aid the future development of MHPSS programmes and ensure their effective implementation across different humanitarian contexts in LMICs. Future research on MHPSS programmes which focus on basic services and security, community and family programmes, their cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of impact could also strengthen the MHPSS evidence base to better inform policy and practice decision-making in humanitarian settings.Protocol registration numberCRD42016033578.

Background Evidence for policy systems emerging around the world combine the fields of research synthesis, evidence-informed policy and public engagement with research. We conducted this retrospective collective autoethnography to understand the role of academics in developing such systems. Methods We constructed a timeline of EPPI Centre work and associated events since 1990. We employed: Transition Theory to reveal emerging and influential innovations; and Transformative Social Innovation theory to track their increasing depth, reach and embeddedness in research and policy organisations. Findings The EPPI Centre, alongside other small research units, collaborated with national and international organisations at the research-policy interface to incubate, spread and embed new ways of working with evidence and policy. Sustainable change arising from research-policy interactions was less about uptake and embedding of innovations, but more about co-developing and tailoring innovations with organisations to suit their missions and structures for creating new knowledge or using knowledge for decisions. Both spreading and embedding innovation relied on mutual learning that both accommodated and challenged established assumptions and values of collaborating organisations as they adapted to closer ways of working. The incubation, spread and embedding of innovations have been iterative, with new ways of working inspiring further innovation as they spread and embedded. Institutionalising evidence for policy required change in both institutions generating evidence and institutions developing policy. Conclusions Key mechanisms for academic contributions to advancing evidence for policy were: contract research focusing attention at the research-policy interface; a willingness to work in unfamiliar fields; inclusive ways of working to move from conflict to consensus; and incentives and opportunities for reflection and consolidating learning.

The number of umbrella reviews (URs) that compiled systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SR-MAs) has increased dramatically over recent years. No formal guidance for assessing the certainty of evidence in URs of meta-analyses exists nowadays. URs of non-interventional studies help establish evidence linking exposure to certain health outcomes in a population. This study aims to identify and describe the methodological approaches for assessing the certainty of the evidence in published URs of non-interventions. We searched from 3 databases including PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library from May 2010 to September 2021. We included URs that included SR-MAs of studies with non-interventions. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data. We compared URs characteristics stratified by publication year, journal ranking, journal impact factor using Chi-square test. Ninety-nine URs have been included. Most were SR-MAs of observational studies evaluating association of non-modifiable risk factors with some outcomes. Only half (56.6%) of the included URs assessed the certainty of the evidence. The most frequently used criteria is credibility assessment (80.4%), followed by GRADE approach (14.3%). URs published in journals with higher journal impact factor assessed certainty of evidence than URs published in lower impact group (77.1 versus 37.2% respectively, p < 0.05). However, criteria for credibility assessment used in four of the seven URs that were published in top ranking journals were slightly varied. Half of URs of MAs of non-interventional studies have assessed the certainty of the evidence, in which criteria for credibility assessment was the commonly used method. Guidance and standards are required to ensure the methodological rigor and consistency of certainty of evidence assessment for URs.

Introduction There is increasing evidence that COVID-19 has unmasked the true magnitude of health inequity worldwide. Policies and guidance for containing the infection and reducing the COVID-19 related deaths have proven to be effective, however the extent to which health inequity factors were considered in these policies is rather unknown. The aim of this study is to measure the extent to which COVID-19 related policies reflect equity considerations by focusing on the global policy landscape around wearing masks and personal protection equipment (PPE). Methods A systematic search for published documents on COVID-19 and masks/PPE was conducted across six databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, ASSIA and Psycinfo. Reviews, policy documents, briefs related to COVID-19 and masks/PPE were included in the review. To assess the extent of incorporation of equity in the policy documents, a guidance framework known as ‘PROGRESS-Plus’: Place of residence, Race/ethnicity, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital, Plus (age, disability etc.) was utilized. Results This review included 212 policy documents. Out of 212 policy documents, 190 policy documents (89.62%) included at least one PROGRESS-plus component. Most of the policy documents ( n  = 163, 85.79%) focused on “occupation” component of the PROGRESS-plus followed by personal characteristics associated with discrimination ( n  = 4;2.11%), place of residence ( n  = 2;1.05%) and education ( n  = 1;0.53%). Subgroup analysis revealed that most of the policy documents ( n  = 176, 83.01%) were focused on “workers” such as healthcare workers, mortuary workers, school workers, transportation workers, essential workers etc. Of the remaining policy documents, most were targeted towards whole population ( n  = 30; 14.15%). Contrary to “worker focused” policy documents, most of the ‘whole population focused’ policy documents didn’t have a PROGRESS-plus equity component rendering them equity limiting for the society. Conclusion Our review highlights even if policies considered health inequity during the design/implementation, this consideration was often one dimensional in nature. In addition, population wide policies should be carefully designed and implemented after identifying relevant equity related barriers in order to produce better outcomes for the whole society.

The COVID-19 pandemic represented a rise in ‘people power’ globally, expressed through manifold acts of kindness, solidarity and mutualism as communities organised and came together where governments could or would not. In this study we were interested in the mechanisms through which communities and agencies extended existing practices and structures to respond to the pandemic or adopted new ways of organising. We undertook a rapid realist systematic review, following established steps and drawing on the Volunteer Process Model as our core theory. We worked with 59 studies to identify the mechanisms through which individuals, agencies and organisations, and communities mobilised and we identified six mechanisms. Gaining experience and developing role identity were key in mobilising volunteers to undertake activities and also resulted in positive outcomes for the volunteers themselves. Adaptability ensured that individuals, groups and local agencies and organisations were able to respond to the changing needs of beneficiary groups. Co-ordination helped communities, agencies and mutual aid groups to work together rather than in competition. Emotional support, support in the form of social and material recognition, and support through training were important in sustaining a volunteer workforce and protecting the wellbeing of the volunteer workforce. Altruism was a key motivator for stepping up during the pandemic and becoming a volunteer while greater trust was linked with the extent to which groups and communities were able to scale up efforts to respond to higher demands during the pandemic. While the COVID-19 pandemic represented a period of great social upheaval, it illuminated the ‘power of people’ working together. Our findings identify six key mechanisms that supported this mobilisation, which may be critical to activate in future health emergencies, but are also largely reflective of investments made before the pandemic to support the development of social capital and the development of volunteering infrastructure.

This study aimed at summarizing the existing health policies for stateless populations living in the 10 ASEAN countries: Brunei, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. We followed scoping review method recommended by Arksey and O’Malley. Our inclusion criteria were based on three concepts: populations (stateless and undocumented people), issues (healthcare policies and regulations), and settings (10 ASEAN countries). Our findings suggest that none of the ASEAN countries have explicit healthcare policies for stateless people except Thailand. We also observed that ratification of international human rights treaties relating to the right to health does not necessarily translate into the provision of healthcare policies for stateless population. Although Thailand seems like the only country among 10 ASIAN countries having health policies for stateless populations in the country, the question remains whether having a policy would lead to a proper implementation by ensuring right to health.

The number of umbrella reviews (URs) that compiled systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SR-MAs) has increased dramatically over recent years. No formal guidance for assessing the certainty of evidence in URs of meta-analyses exists nowadays. URs of non-interventional studies help establish evidence linking exposure to certain health outcomes in a population. This study aims to identify and describe the methodological approaches for assessing the certainty of the evidence in published URs of non-interventions. We searched from 3 databases including PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library from May 2010 to September 2021. We included URs that included SR-MAs of studies with non-interventions. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data. We compared URs characteristics stratified by publication year, journal ranking, journal impact factor using Chi-square test. Ninety-nine URs have been included. Most were SR-MAs of observational studies evaluating association of non-modifiable risk factors with some outcomes. Only half (56.6%) of the included URs assessed the certainty of the evidence. The most frequently used criteria is credibility assessment (80.4%), followed by GRADE approach (14.3%). URs published in journals with higher journal impact factor assessed certainty of evidence than URs published in lower impact group (77.1 versus 37.2% respectively, p < 0.05). However, criteria for credibility assessment used in four of the seven URs that were published in top ranking journals were slightly varied. Half of URs of MAs of non-interventional studies have assessed the certainty of the evidence, in which criteria for credibility assessment was the commonly used method. Guidance and standards are required to ensure the methodological rigor and consistency of certainty of evidence assessment for URs.