CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 237Cultural Competency in Health CarePublic Health Policies and EducationCommunity Health and Development

Adapting health promotion interventions to meet the needs of ethnic minority groups: mixed-methods evidence synthesis.

Open access
Liu, JJ, Davidson, E, Bhopal, RS, White, M, Johnson, MRD, Netto, G, Deverill, M, Sheikh, A·2012·Health Technology Assessment
DOI 10.3310/hta16440PMC PMC4780992
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is now a considerable body of evidence revealing that a number of ethnic minority groups in the UK and other economically developed countries experience disproportionate levels of morbidity and mortality compared with the majority white European-origin population. Across these countries, health-promoting approaches are increasingly viewed as the long-term strategies most likely to prove clinically effective and cost-effective for preventing disease and improving health outcomes in those with established disease. OBJECTIVES: To identify, appraise and interpret research on the approaches employed to maximise the cross-cultural appropriateness and effectiveness of health promotion interventions for smoking cessation, increasing physical activity and improving healthy eating for African-, Chinese- and South Asian-origin populations. DATA SOURCES: Two national conferences; seven databases of UK guidelines and international systematic reviews of health promotion interventions aimed at the general population, including the Clinical Evidence, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network databases (1950-2009); 11 databases of research on adapted health promotion interventions for ethnic minority populations, including BIOSIS, EMBASE and MEDLINE (1950-2009); and in-depth qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of researchers and health promoters. REVIEW METHODS: Theoretically based, mixed-methods, phased programme of research that involved user engagement, systematic reviews and qualitative interviews, which were integrated through a realist synthesis. Following a launch conference, two reviewers independently identified and extracted data from guidelines and systematic reviews on the effectiveness of interventions for the general population and any guidance offered in relation to how to interpret this evidence for ethnic minority populations. Data were thematically analysed. Reviewers then independently identified and critically appraised studies of adapted interventions and summarised data to assess feasibility, acceptability, equity, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Interviews were transcribed, coded and thematically analysed. The quantitative and qualitative data were then synthesised using a realist framework to understand better how adapted interventions work and to assess implementation considerations and prioritise future research. Our preliminary findings were refined through discussion and debate at an end-of-study national user engagement conference. RESULTS: Initial user engagement emphasised the importance of extending this work beyond individual-centred behavioural interventions to also include examination of community- and ecological-level interventions; however, individual-centred behavioural approaches dominated the 15 relevant guidelines and 111 systematic reviews we identified. The most consistent evidence of effectiveness was for pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation. This body of work, however, provided scant evidence on the effectiveness of these interventions for ethnic minority groups. We identified 173 reports of adapted health promotion interventions, the majority of which focused on US-based African Americans. This body of evidence was used to develop a 46-item Typology of Adaptation and a Programme Theory of Adapted Health Promotion Interventions. Only nine empirical studies directly compared the effectiveness of culturally adapted interventions with standard health promotion interventions, these failing to yield any consistent evidence; no studies reported on cost-effectiveness. The 26 qualitative interviews highlighted the need to extend thinking on ethnicity from conventional dimensions to more contextual considerations. The realist synthesis enabled the production of a decision-making tool (RESET) to support future research. LIMITATIONS: The lack of robust evidence of effectiveness for physical activity and healthy-eating interventions in the general population identified at the outset limited the comparative synthesis work we could undertake in the latter phases. Furthermore, the majority of studies undertaking an adapted intervention were conducted within African American populations; this raises important questions about the generalisability of findings to, for example, a UK context and other ethnic minority groups. Lastly, given our focus on three health areas and three populations, we have inevitably excluded many studies of adapted interventions for other health topics and other ethnic minority populations. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently a lack of evidence on how best to deliver smoking cessation, physical activity and healthy eating-related health promotion interventions to ethnic minority populations. Although culturally adapting interventions can increase salience, acceptability and uptake, there is as yet insufficient evidence on the clinical effectiveness or cost-ef

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3310/hta16440

Cites

325 of 325 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

58 of the 383 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, J., Davidson, E., Bhopal, R., White, M., Johnson, M., Netto, G., Deverill, M., & Sheikh, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • De Montfort University (GB)
  • Heriot-Watt University (GB)
Corresponding author
Sheikh, A
ORCID
Venue
Health Technology Assessment
Publisher
National Institute for Health and Care Research
Published
2012-11
Volume
16
Issue
44
Pages
1-469
ISSN
  • 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
  • 2046-4924
DOI
10.3310/hta16440
PMC
PMC4780992
OpenAlex
W2009879849
Cited by
237
References
383
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 1
FWCI
9.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Health Technology Assessment (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DMU Open Research Archive (De Montfort University) (submittedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
Health Technology Assessment programme (07/63/03)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Cultural Competency in Health Care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
Keywords
health promotion interventions, ethnic minorities, cross-cultural adaptation (acculturation), smoking cessation, physical activity, healthy eating, African-origin populations, pharmacological smoking cessation, community-based intervention, health disparities, realist synthesis, user engagement, implementation considerations, cost-effectiveness, clinical effectiveness, health care equity, health promoters, community health workers
MeSH terms
Black or African American, Cultural Characteristics, Diet, Health Promotion, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Motor Activity, Smoking Cessation, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Black People, Asian People

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review