Investigating the burden of antibiotic resistance in ethnic minority groups in high-income countries: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
ABSTRACT: Antibiotic resistance (ABR) is an urgent problem globally, with overuse and misuse of antibiotics being one of the main drivers of antibiotic-resistant infections. There is increasing evidence that the burden of community-acquired infections such as urinary tract infections and bloodstream infections (both susceptible and resistant) may differ by ethnicity, although the reasons behind this relationship are not well defined. It has been demonstrated that socioeconomic status and ethnicity are often highly correlated with each other; however, it is not yet known whether accounting for deprivation completely explains any discrepancy seen in infection risk. There have currently been no systematic reviews summarising the evidence for the relationship between ethnicity and antibiotic resistance or prescribing.This protocol will outline how we will conduct this systematic literature review and meta-analysis investigating whether there is an association between patient ethnicity and (1) risk of antibiotic-resistant infections or (2) levels of antibiotic prescribing in high-income countries. We will search PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, Scopus and CINAHL using MESH terms where applicable. Two reviewers will conduct title/abstract screening, data extraction and quality assessment independently. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist will be used for cohort and case-control studies, and the Cochrane collaboration's risk of bias tool will be used for randomised control trials, if they are included. Meta-analyses will be performed by calculating the minority ethnic group to majority ethnic group odds ratios or risk ratios for each study and presenting an overall pooled odds ratio for the two outcomes. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the overall quality of the body of evidence.In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we will aim to collate the available evidence of whether there is a difference in rates of AMR and/or antibiotic prescribing in minority vs. majority ethnic groups in high-income countries. Additionally, this review will highlight areas where more research needs to be conducted and may provide insight into what may cause differences in this relationship, should they be seen.PROSPERO ( CRD42016051533 ).
Project description:BackgroundIt is well established that migration and ethnic minority status are risk factors for psychotic disorders. Recent studies have aimed to determine if they are also associated with subclinical psychosis (psychotic-like experiences and schizotypal traits).AimsWe aimed to determine to what extent migrant and ethnic minority groups are associated with higher risk of subclinical psychosis.MethodWe conducted a systematic review, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, and examined findings by ethnicity, migrant status, outcomes of subclinical psychosis and host country. A meta-analysis was carried out with robust variance estimation where possible, to handle statistically dependent effect size estimates.ResultsWe included 28 studies (19 studies on psychotic-like experiences and 9 studies on schizotypal traits) and found that ethnicity, but not migrant status, was associated with current and lifetime psychotic-like experiences. In the narrative analysis, we observed the effect of psychosocial risk factors on this association: Black ethnicity groups showed consistent increased prevalence of current and lifetime psychotic-like experiences compared with the reference population across countries.ConclusionsMore generalisable and standardised cohort studies of psychotic-like experiences and schizotypal traits in relation to migration/ethnicity are necessary to examine the effects of exposures and outcomes in different contexts, and to understand the underlying mechanisms of the association between subclinical psychosis and migrant and ethnic minority status.Declaration of interestNone.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite increased ethnic diversity in more economically developed countries it is unclear whether residential concentration of ethnic minority people (ethnic density) is detrimental or protective for mental health. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis covering the international literature, assessing ethnic density associations with mental health outcomes. METHODS:We systematically searched Medline, PsychINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science from inception to 31 March 2016. We obtained additional data from study authors. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis taking into account clustering of estimates within datasets. Meta-regression assessed heterogeneity in studies due to ethnicity, country, generation, and area-level deprivation. Our main exposure was ethnic density, defined as the residential concentration of own racial/ethnic minority group. Outcomes included depression, anxiety and the common mental disorders (CMD), suicide, suicidality, psychotic experiences, and psychosis. RESULTS:We included 41 studies in the review, with meta-analysis of 12 studies. In the meta-analyses, we found a large reduction in relative odds of psychotic experiences [odds ratio (OR) 0.82 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.89)] and suicidal ideation [OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.79-0.98)] for each 10 percentage-point increase in own ethnic density. For CMD, depression, and anxiety, associations were indicative of protective effects of own ethnic density; however, results were not statistically significant. Findings from narrative review were consistent with those of the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS:The findings support consistent protective ethnic density associations across countries and racial/ethnic minority populations as well as mental health outcomes. This may suggest the importance of the social environment in patterning detrimental mental health outcomes in marginalized and excluded population groups.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Patients from ethnic minority groups are disproportionately affected by Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the relationship between ethnicity and clinical outcomes in COVID-19.<h4>Methods</h4>Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PROSPERO, Cochrane library and <i>MedRxiv</i>) were searched up to 31st August 2020, for studies reporting COVID-19 data disaggregated by ethnicity. Outcomes were: risk of infection; intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission and death. PROSPERO ID: 180654.<h4>Findings</h4>18,728,893 patients from 50 studies were included; 26 were peer-reviewed; 42 were from the United States of America and 8 from the United Kingdom. Individuals from Black and Asian ethnicities had a higher risk of COVID-19 infection compared to White individuals. This was consistent in both the main analysis (pooled adjusted RR for Black: 2.02, 95% CI 1.67-2.44; pooled adjusted RR for Asian: 1.50, 95% CI 1.24-1.83) and sensitivity analyses examining peer-reviewed studies only (pooled adjusted RR for Black: 1.85, 95%CI: 1.46-2.35; pooled adjusted RR for Asian: 1.51, 95% CI 1.22-1.88). Individuals of Asian ethnicity may also be at higher risk of ITU admission (pooled adjusted RR 1.97 95% CI 1.34-2.89) (but no studies had yet been peer-reviewed) and death (pooled adjusted RR/HR 1.22 [0.99-1.50]).<h4>Interpretation</h4>Individuals of Black and Asian ethnicity are at increased risk of COVID-19 infection compared to White individuals; Asians may be at higher risk of ITU admission and death. These findings are of critical public health importance in informing interventions to reduce morbidity and mortality amongst ethnic minority groups.
Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:In the primary care setting, there are racial and ethnic differences in antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs). Viral ARTIs are commonly diagnosed in the pediatric emergency department (PED), in which racial and ethnic differences in antibiotic prescribing have not been previously reported. We sought to investigate whether patient race and ethnicity was associated with differences in antibiotic prescribing for viral ARTIs in the PED. METHODS:This is a retrospective cohort study of encounters at 7 PEDs in 2013, in which we used electronic health data from the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network Registry. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between patient race and ethnicity and antibiotics administered or prescribed among children discharged from the hospital with viral ARTI. Children with bacterial codiagnoses, chronic disease, or who were immunocompromised were excluded. Covariates included age, sex, insurance, triage level, provider type, emergency department type, and emergency department site. RESULTS:Of 39?445 PED encounters for viral ARTIs that met inclusion criteria, 2.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.4%-2.8%) received antibiotics, including 4.3% of non-Hispanic (NH) white, 1.9% of NH black, 2.6% of Hispanic, and 2.9% of other NH children. In multivariable analyses, NH black (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.44; CI 0.36-0.53), Hispanic (aOR 0.65; CI 0.53-0.81), and other NH (aOR 0.68; CI 0.52-0.87) children remained less likely to receive antibiotics for viral ARTIs. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with NH white children, NH black and Hispanic children were less likely to receive antibiotics for viral ARTIs in the PED. Future research should seek to understand why racial and ethnic differences in overprescribing exist, including parental expectations, provider perceptions of parental expectations, and implicit provider bias.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Effective antibiotic options in general practice for patients with infections are declining significantly due to antibiotic over-prescribing and emerging antibiotic resistance. To better improve antibiotic prescribing by general practitioner (GP), pharmacist-GP collaborations have been promoted under antibiotic stewardship programmes. However, there is insufficient information about whether and how pharmacists help GPs to more appropriately prescribe antibiotics. This systematic review aims to determine whether pharmacist-led or pharmacist-involved interventions are effective at improving antibiotic prescribing by GPs.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>A systematic review of English language randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time series studies cited in MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL Plus, PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science databases will be conducted. Studies will be included if a pharmacist is involved as the intervention provider and GPs are the intervention recipients in general practice setting. Data extraction and management will be conducted using Effective Practice and Organisation of Care data abstraction tools and a template for intervention description and replication. The Cochrane and ROBINS-I risk of bias assessment tools will be used to assess the methodological quality of studies. Primary outcome measures include changes (overall, broad spectrum and guidelines concordance) of GP-prescribed antibiotics. Secondary outcomes include quality of antibiotic prescribing, delayed antibiotic use, acceptability and feasibility of interventions. Meta-analysis for combined effect and forest plots, ?<sup>2</sup> test and I<sup>2</sup> statistics for detailed heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis will be performed if data permit. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidance will be used to report findings.<h4>Ethics and dissemination</h4>No ethics approval is required as no primary, personal or confidential data are being collected in this study. The findings will be disseminated to national and international scientific sessions and published in a peer-reviewed journal.<h4>Prospero registration number</h4>CRD42017078478.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Ethnic minority individuals have an increased risk of developing a psychotic disorder, particularly if they live in areas of ethnic segregation, or low own group ethnic density. The neurobiological mechanisms underlying this ethnic minority associated risk are unknown. We used functional MRI to investigate neural responses to faces of different ethnicity, in individuals of black ethnicity, and a control group of white British ethnicity individuals. METHODS:In total 20 individuals of black ethnicity, and 22 individuals of white British ethnicity underwent a 3T MRI scan while viewing faces of black and white ethnicity. Own group ethnic density was calculated from the 2011 census. Neighbourhood segregation was quantified using the Index of Dissimilarity method. RESULTS:At the within-group level, both groups showed greater right amygdala activation to outgroup faces. Between groups, the black ethnicity group showed greater right amygdala activation to white faces, compared to the white ethnicity group. Within the black ethnicity group, individuals living in areas of lower own group ethnic density showed greater right amygdala reactivity to white faces (r = -0.61, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:This is the first time an increased amygdala response to white faces has been demonstrated in individuals of black ethnicity. In the black ethnicity group, correlations were observed between amygdala response and neighbourhood variables associated with increased psychosis risk. These results may have relevance for our understanding of the increased rates of paranoia and psychotic disorders in ethnic minority individuals.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:After the 2004 FDA box warning raised concerns about increased suicidal ideation among youth taking antidepressants, antidepressant use decreased for White youth but slightly increased for Black and Latino youth. Better understanding of patient and provider factors contributing to these differences is needed to improve future risk warning dissemination. METHODS:We analyzed antidepressant prescriptions for youth aged 5-17 in 2002-2006 Medicaid claims data from four states (CA, FL, NC, and NY). In multilevel models, we assessed provider- and patient-level contributions to changes in antidepressant use by race/ethnicity and compared responses to the box warning between providers with large (>2/3) and small (<1/3) proportions of minority patients. RESULTS:A significant amount of variance in overall prescribing patterns (calculated by the ICC) was explained at the provider level. Significant provider-level variation was also identified in the differential effect of the box warning by racial/ethnic group. In a test of the influence of provider panel mix, we found that providers with large proportions of minority patients reduced antidepressant prescribing more slowly after the box warning than other providers. DISCUSSION:This study is the first to assess provider- and patient-level variation in the impact of a health care policy change on treatment disparities. Black and Latino youth Medicaid beneficiaries were seen by largely different providers than their White counterparts, and these distinct providers were influential in driving antidepressant prescription patterns following the box warning. Concerted outreach to providers of minority beneficiaries is needed to ensure that risk warnings and clinical innovations diffuse swiftly across racial/ethnic minority groups.
Project description:<b>Background</b> : The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has highlighted consistent inequities in the risk of infection, severity of disease, or mortality across racial and ethnic minority populations in the United States and beyond. Although novel, SARS-CoV-2 shares commonalities in transmission dynamics with other viral respiratory pathogens where similar disparities in morbidity and mortality have been documented. However, to date, there has not been a systematic review of disparities in viral respiratory pathogens. In response, this review aims to synthesize data on racial and ethnic disparities in morbidity and mortality due to viral acute respiratory infections (ARI) other than SARS-CoV-2. In particular, this review will focus on understanding structural health and social factors outside of race and ethnicity driving these disparities in the United States. <b>Methods</b> : We will conduct a systematic review of studies published between January 1, 2002 and September 30, 2020 that capture data on racial and ethnic disparities associated with increased incidence, disease severity, risk of hospitalization and/or death in viral ARI in the United States. Data characterizing individual-, community-, and structural-level factors associated with these disparities will be abstracted to better understand the underlying structural inequities contributing to racial disparities in ARI. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines will be used with reviewers employing COVIDENCE to conduct two independent rounds of title/abstract and full text reviews for all articles. A built-in tool in COVIDENCE will be used for data abstraction. <b>Discussion</b> : Findings from this systematic review will shed light on patterns of racial and ethnic disparities in viral ARI in the United States. Leveraging these data can support predictive studies of the differential impacts of COVID-19 across the United States as well as adaptive intervention strategies mitigating structural inequities, including structural racism, driving both incidence and disparities in marginalized communities. Moreover, data emerging from this review may reignite pandemic preparedness focused on vulnerable communities given structural inequities, facilitating improved future pandemic responses to novel or endemic viral respiratory pathogens in the United States. <b>Systematic review registration</b> : PROSPERO CRD42020219771.
Project description:Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are common in children and generally self-limiting, yet often result in consultations to primary care. Frequent consultations divert resources from care for potentially more serious conditions and increase the opportunity for antibiotic overuse. Overuse of antibiotics is associated with adverse effects and antimicrobial resistance, and has been shown to influence how patients seek care in ensuing illness episodes.We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of interventions directed towards parents or caregivers which were designed to influence consulting and antibiotic use for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in children in primary care. Main outcomes were parental consulting rate, parental knowledge, and proportion of children subsequently consuming antibiotics. Of 5,714 references, 23 studies (representing 20 interventions) met inclusion criteria. Materials designed to engage children in addition to parents were effective in modifying parental knowledge and behaviour, resulting in reductions in consulting rates ranging from 13 to 40%. Providing parents with delayed prescriptions significantly decreased reported antibiotic use (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.46 (0.40, 0.54); moreover, a delayed or no prescribing approach did not diminish parental satisfaction.IN ORDER TO BE MOST EFFECTIVE, INTERVENTIONS TO INFLUENCE PARENTAL CONSULTING AND ANTIBIOTIC USE SHOULD: engage children, occur prior to an illness episode, employ delayed prescribing, and provide guidance on specific symptoms. These results support the wider implementation of interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic use in children.
Project description:The Ethnic Minority Meta-Analysis (EMMA) aims to assess racial/ethnic disparities in HIV infection among people who inject drugs (PWID) across various countries. This is the first report of the data.Standard systematic review/meta-analysis methods were utilized, including searching for, screening and coding published and unpublished reports and meta-analytical statistics. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines for reporting methods. Disparities were measured with the odds ratio (OR) for HIV prevalence among ethnic minority PWID compared to ethnic majority PWID; an OR >1.0 indicated higher prevalence among ethnic minorities.Racial/ethnic disparities in HIV prevalence among PWID were examined in 131 prevalence reports, with 214 racial/ethnic minority to majority comparisons, comprising 106?715 PWID. Overall, the pooled OR indicates an increased likelihood of higher HIV prevalence among racial/ethnic minority compared to racial/ethnic majority PWID [OR?=?2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.92-2.28]. Among 214 comparisons, 106 produced a statistically significant higher OR for minorities; in 102 comparisons the OR was not significantly different from 1.0; six comparisons produced a statistically significant higher OR for majority group members. Disparities were particularly large in the United States, pooled OR?=?2.22 (95% CI: 2.03-2.44). There was substantial variation in ORs-I(2) ?=?75.3%: interquartile range?=?1.38-3.56-and an approximate Gaussian distribution of the log ORs.Among people who inject drugs, ethnic minorities are approximately twice as likely to be HIV seropositive than ethnic majorities. The great heterogeneity and Gaussian distribution suggest multiple causal factors and a need to tailor interventions to local conditions.