The experiences of minority language users in health and social care
research: A systematic review
Abstract
Background: The planning and management of health policy is directly
linked to evidence-based research. To obtain the most rigorous results
in research it is important to have a representative sample. However,
ethnic minorities are often not accounted for in research. Migration,
equality, and diversity issues are important priorities which need to be
considered by researchers. The aim of this systematic review (SR) is to
explore the literature examining the experiences of minority language
users in Health and Social Care Research (HSCR). Method: A SR of the
literature was conducted. SPIDER framework and Cochrane principles were
utilized to conduct the review. Five databases were searched, yielding
5311 papers initially. A SR protocol was developed and published in
PROSPERO:
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020225114analysis.
Results: Following the title and abstract review by two reviewers, 74
papers were included, and a narrative account was provided. Six themes
were identified: 1. Disparities in healthcare; 2. Maternal health; 3.
Mental health; 4. Methodology in health research; 5. Migrant and
minority healthcare; 6. Racial and ethnic gaps in healthcare. Results
showed that language barriers (including language proficiency) and
cultural barriers still exist in terms of recruitment, possibly
effecting the validity of the results. Several papers acknowledged
language barriers but did not act to reduce them. Conclusion: Despite
research highlighting cultures over the past 40 years, there is a need
for this to be acknowledged and embedded in the research process. We
propose that future research should include details of languages spoken
so readers can understand the sample composition to be able to interpret
the results in the best way, recognising the significance of culture and
language. If language is not considered as a significant aspect of
research, the findings of the research cannot be rigorous and therefore
the validity is compromised.