ArticleBMJ open2022
Understanding discrimination towards persons experiencing homelessness: A scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionGiven the increasing rates of homelessness in recent years, there is an urgent need to address the ongoing discrimination and societal disinterest in preventing, reducing and ending homelessness. There is no systematic review of experiences of stigma and discrimination among persons experiencing homelessness or interventions to combat this discrimination. The objective for the proposed study is to identify ways in which persons experiencing homelessness have been stigmatised and discriminated against, the results of these experiences, and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination towards persons experiencing homelessness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We are conducting a scoping review with guidance from the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and Arksey and O'Malley's framework. From 15 to 19 July 2022, we searched the following databases from our institutional licensed years of coverage: Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, Academic Search Ultimate, APA PsycINFO, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Arts & Humanities Citation Index, Emerging Sources Citation Index, Left, PAIS International, PILOTS, Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection, Sociological Abstracts, and Dissertations and Theses Global. Two independent reviewers are screening study titles/abstracts and will independently screen the full texts. Study inclusion criteria include any study type reporting primary findings of English-language research on non-refugee persons experiencing homelessness in any type of setting or service worldwide. Three reviewers will then chart data of our included studies. Data will be extracted and organised into categories and subthemes in tabular form. To understand the validity of the scoping review findings in the local context and to gather additional perspectives on the topic, we will conduct an 'expert consultation' workshop. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has ethics approval from the University of Utah Institutional Review Board. Review findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and at conferences. We plan to preregister this protocol with Open Science Framework.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.