Search

Aims: This paper examines the importance of recruitment site in relation to the recruitment of ethnic minorities into health research. It presents a synthesis of experiences drawn from six interlinked Danish studies which applied different methods and used healthcare facilities and educational settings as sites for recruitment. Methods: Inspired by interpretive reviewing, data on recruitment methods from the different studies were synthesized with a focus on the various levels of recruitment success achieved. This involved an iterative process of comparison, analysis and discussion of experiences among the researchers involved. Results: Success in recruitment seemed to depend partly on recruitment site. Using healthcare facilities as the recruitment site and healthcare professionals as gatekeepers was less efficient than using schools and employees from educational institutions. Successful study designs also depended on the possibility of singling out specific locations with a high proportion of the relevant ethnic minority target population. Conclusions:The findings, though based on a small number of cases, indicate that health professionals and healthcare institutions, despite their interest in high-quality health research into all population groups, fail to facilitate research access to some of the most disadvantaged groups, who need to be included in order to understand the mechanisms behind health disparities. This happens despite the genuine wish of many healthcare professionals to help facilitate such research. In this way, the findings indirectly emphasize the specific challenge of accessing more vulnerable and sick groups in research studies.

Aims: Adult non-Western immigrants in Scandinavia tend to be worse off in terms of health than native-born populations, which cannot be fully ascribed to their often lower socioeconomic status (SES). This review examines if differences in health status are also present between non-Western immigrant and majority children in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, and if SES explains the differences. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, relevant Scandinavian peer-reviewed quantitative publications since 1990 were identified through a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and SveMed. Of 1197 identified publications, 27 remained relevant after applying inclusion criteria: 3 Danish, 6 Norwegian and 18 Swedish studies. Results: Non-western immigrant children had overall poorer outcomes compared with ethnic majority children in Denmark, Norway and Sweden in health issues covered by the included studies: diabetes, obesity, oral and mental health, and well-being. However, in diabetes, obesity and mental health, non-Western immigrant children from certain countries and regions, and descendants of non-Western immigrants had similar/more favourable outcomes than majority children. In mental health and well-being, ethnic inequalities were strongly associated with SES, while for diabetes, obesity and oral health, differences remained significant after adjusting for SES. Conclusions: Overall poorer health outcomes in non-Western immigrant compared with majority children in Scandinavia cannot be fully explained by SES. Evidence points to additional mechanisms at individual, household, societal or policy levels, including reasons for migration, culture and societal discrimination. Finally, methodological issues may influence study outcomes, e.g. heterogeneity of populations studied and socioeconomic variables included.