Scoping review of the characteristics assessed by vulnerability indices applied to people experiencing homelessness.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
11
12
2020
accepted:
19
06
2021
entrez:
9
7
2021
pubmed:
10
7
2021
medline:
17
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The objectives of this scoping review are to investigate the characteristics assessed by existing vulnerability indices and the health outcomes achieved by applying them to people experiencing homelessness. This review forms part of the development and implementation of a novel tool to prioritise people experiencing homelessness for healthcare based on their need and capacity to access healthcare. Included papers were primary research, published in the English language, participants were experiencing homelessness and aged over 18 years at the time of the study, a vulnerability index was used in the study, sample size was greater than 30, and the study had a health focus. Databases searched were MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science, between January-April 2020. The Joanna Briggs Appraisal criteria were used to quality appraise the included studies. Results were synthesised narratively. Six papers were included, a total of 27,509 participants. The reported use of the indices varied; they included screening and profiling homeless populations, comparing homeless populations, and two studies evaluated the predictive capacity, reliability and validity of the indices. One vulnerability index focused on screening for human immunodeficiency virus, one used a 50-item index and four used a nine-item index. No direct health outcomes were reported from applying the vulnerability indices. The studies identified limitations of using vulnerability indices, including the potential bias of relying on self-reported data and two studies highlighted the need for further psychometric testing to ensure validity and reliability of the indices. The sample of included studies was small. Vulnerability indices are reportedly a useful and easily accessible method of gaining valuable data on the health status and health needs of people experiencing homelessness. The variety of characteristics included in the vulnerability indices suggests the importance of tailoring vulnerability indices to the needs of the population to which it is to be applied. Conducting appropriate psychometric testing is critical so that an index can be used to accurately inform decision making and accurately prioritise people experiencing homelessness who are most at risk of mortality and morbidity. A specific tool that prioritises people experiencing homelessness for access to health care is not yet available. The review was funded by a St Vincent's Network Inclusive Health grant.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The objectives of this scoping review are to investigate the characteristics assessed by existing vulnerability indices and the health outcomes achieved by applying them to people experiencing homelessness. This review forms part of the development and implementation of a novel tool to prioritise people experiencing homelessness for healthcare based on their need and capacity to access healthcare.
METHODS
Included papers were primary research, published in the English language, participants were experiencing homelessness and aged over 18 years at the time of the study, a vulnerability index was used in the study, sample size was greater than 30, and the study had a health focus. Databases searched were MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science, between January-April 2020. The Joanna Briggs Appraisal criteria were used to quality appraise the included studies. Results were synthesised narratively.
RESULTS
Six papers were included, a total of 27,509 participants. The reported use of the indices varied; they included screening and profiling homeless populations, comparing homeless populations, and two studies evaluated the predictive capacity, reliability and validity of the indices. One vulnerability index focused on screening for human immunodeficiency virus, one used a 50-item index and four used a nine-item index. No direct health outcomes were reported from applying the vulnerability indices. The studies identified limitations of using vulnerability indices, including the potential bias of relying on self-reported data and two studies highlighted the need for further psychometric testing to ensure validity and reliability of the indices.
DISCUSSION
The sample of included studies was small. Vulnerability indices are reportedly a useful and easily accessible method of gaining valuable data on the health status and health needs of people experiencing homelessness. The variety of characteristics included in the vulnerability indices suggests the importance of tailoring vulnerability indices to the needs of the population to which it is to be applied. Conducting appropriate psychometric testing is critical so that an index can be used to accurately inform decision making and accurately prioritise people experiencing homelessness who are most at risk of mortality and morbidity. A specific tool that prioritises people experiencing homelessness for access to health care is not yet available. The review was funded by a St Vincent's Network Inclusive Health grant.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34242298
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254100
pii: PONE-D-20-36401
pmc: PMC8270124
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0254100Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Lancet. 2014 Oct 25;384(9953):1541-7
pubmed: 25390579
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Jul;123:177-179
pubmed: 32229248
J Community Health Nurs. 2018 Oct-Dec;35(4):189-195
pubmed: 30285485
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2005 Jul-Aug;11(4):311-6
pubmed: 15958930
Circulation. 2005 May 24;111(20):2629-35
pubmed: 15897342
Lancet. 2014 Oct 25;384(9953):1529-40
pubmed: 25390578
Public Health Rep. 2016 Nov;131(6):765-772
pubmed: 28123222
J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2013 May;24(2):469-86
pubmed: 23728023
J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2020;31(1):441-454
pubmed: 32037341
Med Care. 2011 Apr;49(4):350-4
pubmed: 21368678
Arch Intern Med. 1998 Jul 13;158(13):1454-60
pubmed: 9665356
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Feb 11;173(3):189-95
pubmed: 23318302
Emerg Med J. 2011 May;28(5):422-7
pubmed: 20682956
CMAJ. 2001 Jan 23;164(2):229-33
pubmed: 11332321
Curr Cardiol Rev. 2009 Jan;5(1):69-77
pubmed: 20066152
Soc Work Public Health. 2014;29(1):73-80
pubmed: 24188298
Lancet Public Health. 2020 Jan;5(1):e19-e32
pubmed: 31806487
Lancet. 2018 Jan 20;391(10117):241-250
pubmed: 29137869