ReviewPerspectives in public health2026
Evaluating the impact of the Health Access for Refugees Project on people who are refugees or seeking asylum in Northern England.
Review in Perspectives in public health, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsEvidence demonstrates that people who are seeking asylum and refugees face individual, institutional and system-level barriers when accessing health services. Health Access for Refugees' Project (HARP) is a UK initiative increasing access to health care within this community through a series of interventions. This study explored the impact of HARP on health service access, experiences and outcomes for clients, and how volunteers and staff addressed institutional and system-level barriers.
methodsIn summer 2020, we conducted qualitative telephone interviews with four HARP clients, eight clients who became volunteers, seven further volunteers and three staff members.
resultsThe educational aspect of the interventions supported clients navigating the complex UK health care system while promoting independence in accessing health care. Advocacy by volunteers and staff was important in challenging barriers at individual and institutional levels. Staff challenged the asylum system, by improving information around entitlement to health care and addressing barriers to registering with a General Practitioner (GP).
conclusionsInterventions such as those provided by HARP can address different levels of barriers to support people accessing health care provision. This can be achieved through training health professionals and working with peers to support access to care and to develop self-advocacy. However, stable long-term funding is essential to ensure the sustainability of these initiative.
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.