Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26772613›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Perspectives and experiences of new migrants on health screening in Sweden.

Faustine Kyungu Nkulu Kalengayi, Anna-Karin Hurtig, Annika Nordstrand, Clas Ahlm, Beth Maina Ahlberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Severity as a Priority Setting Criterion: Setting a Challenging Research Agenda.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Faustine Kyungu Nkulu KalengayiDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Division of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, SE- 901 87, Umeå, Sweden. faustine.nkulu@epiph.umu.se.
Anna-Karin HurtigDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Division of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, SE- 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Annika NordstrandNorrbotten County Council, Public Health Center, SE-971 89, Luleå, Sweden.
Clas AhlmDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Division of Infectious Diseases, Umeå University, SE- 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Beth Maina AhlbergDepartment of Women's and Child Health, Uppsala University, SE- 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Umeå University · SESkaraborg Hospital · SEVästerbotten County · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Sweden, migrants from countries considered to have a high burden of certain infectious diseases are offered health screening to prevent the spread of these diseases, but also identify their health needs. However, very little is known about their experiences and perceptions about the screening process. This study aimed at exploring these perceptions and experiences in order to inform policy and clinical practice.

methodUsing an interpretive description framework, 26 new migrants were interviewed between April and June 2013 in four Swedish counties. Thematic analysis was used to analyze data.

resultsThe three themes developed include: new country, new practices; new requirements in the new country; and unmet needs and expectations. Participants described what it meant for them to come to a new country with a foreign language, new ways of communicating with caregivers/authorities and being offered health screening without clarification. Participants perceived health screening as a requirement from the authorities to be fulfilled by all newcomers but conceded that it benefits equally the host society and themselves. However, they also expressed concern over the involvement of the Migration Board staff and feared possible collaboration with health service to their detriment. They further stated that the screening program fell short of their expectations as it mainly focused on identifying infectious diseases and overlooked their actual health needs. Finally, they expressed frustration over delay in screening, poor living conditions in reception centers and the restrictive entitlement to care.

conclusionsMigrants are aware of their vulnerability and the need to undergo health screening though they view it as an official requirement. Thus, those who underwent the screening were more concerned about residency rather than the actual benefits of screening. The issues highlighted in this study may limit access to and uptake of the screening service, and compromise its effectiveness. To maximize the uptake: (1) linguistically and culturally adapted information is needed, (2) other screening approaches should be tried, (3) trained medical interpreters should be used, (4) a holistic and human right approach should be applied, (5) the involvement of migration staff should be reconsidered to avoid confusion and worries. Finally, to improve the effectiveness, (6) all migrants from targeted countries should be offered screening and efforts should be taken to improve the health literacy of migrants and the living conditions in reception centers.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthCommunicable Disease ControlAdultAfricaAsiaCaregiversCommunicable DiseasesCooperative BehaviorEuropeFemaleHealth PolicyHumansLanguageMaleMass ScreeningMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID26772613
PMCPMC4714486
OpenAlexW2238322990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.