Sociodemographic inequities associated with participation in leisure-time physical activity in sub-Saharan Africa: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) is an important contributor to total physical activity and the focus of many interventions promoting activity in high-income populations. Little is known about LTPA in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), and with expected declines in physical activity due to rapid urbanisation and lifestyle changes we aimed to assess the sociodemographic differences in the prevalence of LTPA in the adult populations of this region to identify potential barriers for equitable participation. METHODS: A two-step individual participant data meta-analysis was conducted using data collected in SSA through 10 population health surveys that included the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. For each sociodemographic characteristic, the pooled adjusted prevalence and risk ratios (RRs) for participation in LTPA were calculated using the random effects method. Between-study heterogeneity was explored through meta-regression analyses and tests for interaction. RESULTS: Across the 10 populations (N = 26,022), 18.9% (95%CI: 14.3, 24.1; I2 = 99.0%) of adults (≥ 18 years) participated in LTPA. Men were more likely to participate in LTPA compared with women (RR for women: 0.43; 95%CI: 0.32, 0.60; P < 0.001; I2 = 97.5%), while age was inversely associated with participation. Higher levels of education were associated with increased LTPA participation (RR: 1.30; 95%CI: 1.09, 1.55; P = 0.004; I2 = 98.1%), with those living in rural areas or self-employed less likely to participate in LTPA. These associations remained after adjusting for time spent physically active at work or through active travel. CONCLUSIONS: In these populations, participation in LTPA was low, and strongly associated with sex, age, education, self-employment and urban residence. Identifying the potential barriers that reduce participation in these groups is necessary to enable equitable access to the health and social benefits associated with LTPA.

Global patterns of mortality in international migrants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: 258 million people reside outside their country of birth; however, to date no global systematic reviews or meta-analyses of mortality data for these international migrants have been done. We aimed to review and synthesise available mortality data on international migrants. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases for observational studies, systematic reviews, and randomised controlled trials published between Jan 1, 2001, and March 31, 2017, without language restrictions. We included studies reporting mortality outcomes for international migrants of any age residing outside their country of birth. Studies that recruited participants exclusively from intensive care or high dependency hospital units, with an existing health condition or status, or a particular health exposure were excluded. We also excluded studies limited to maternal or perinatal outcomes. We screened studies using systematic review software and extracted data from published reports. The main outcomes were all-cause and International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD-10) cause-specific standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) and absolute mortality rates. We calculated summary estimates using random-effects models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42017073608. FINDINGS: Of the 12 480 articles identified by our search, 96 studies were eligible for inclusion. The studies were geographically diverse and included data from all global regions and for 92 countries. 5464 mortality estimates for more than 15·2 million migrants were included, of which 5327 (97%) were from high-income countries, 115 (2%) were from middle-income countries, and 22 (<1%) were from low-income countries. Few studies included mortality estimates for refugees (110 estimates), asylum seekers (144 estimates), or labour migrants (six estimates). The summary estimate of all-cause SMR for international migrants was lower than one when compared with the general population in destination countries (0·70 [95% CI 0·65-0·76]; I2=99·8%). All-cause SMR was lower in both male migrants (0·72 [0·63-0·81]; I2=99·8%) and female migrants (0·75 [0·67-0·84]; I2=99·8%) compared with the general population. A mortality advantage was evident for refugees (SMR 0·50 [0·46-0·54]; I2=89·8%), but not for asylum seekers (1·05 [0·89-1·24]; I2=54·4%), although limited data was available on these groups. SMRs for all causes of death were lower in migrants compared with the general populations in the destination country across all 13 ICD-10 categories analysed, with the exception of infectious diseases and external causes. Heterogeneity was high across the majority of analyses. Point estimates of all-cause age-standardised mortality in migrants ranged from 420 to 874 per 100 000 population. INTERPRETATION: Our study showed that international migrants have a mortality advantage compared with general populations, and that this advantage persisted across the majority of ICD-10 disease categories. The mortality advantage identified will be representative of international migrants in high-income countries who are studying, working, or have joined family members in these countries. However, our results might not reflect the health outcomes of more marginalised groups in low-income and middle-income countries because little data were available for these groups, highlighting an important gap in existing research. Our results present an opportunity to reframe the public discourse on international migration and health in high-income countries. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, Department for International Development, Fogarty International Center, Grand Challenges Canada, International Development Research Centre Canada, Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, National Cancer Institute, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institute of Mental Health, Swiss National Science Foundation, World Diabetes Foundation, UK National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, and European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group Research Funding for the ESCMID Study Group for Infections in Travellers and Migrants.

Methods to increase reporting of childhood sexual abuse in surveys: the sensitivity and specificity of face-to-face interviews versus a sealed envelope method in Ugandan primary school children.

BACKGROUND: Underreporting of childhood sexual abuse is a major barrier to obtaining reliable prevalence estimates. We tested the sensitivity and specificity of the face-to-face-interview (FTFI) method by comparing the number of disclosures of forced sex against a more confidential mode of data collection, the sealed-envelope method (SEM). We also report on characteristics of individuals associated with non-disclosure in FTFIs. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2014, with n = 3843 children attending primary school in Luwero District, Uganda. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated, and mixed effects logistic regression models tested factors associated with disclosure in one or both modes. RESULTS: In the FTFI, 1.1% (n = 42) of children reported ever experiencing forced sex, compared to 7.0% (n = 268) in the SEM. The FTFI method demonstrated low sensitivity (13.1%, 95%CI 9.3-17.7%) and high specificity (99.8%, 95%CI 99.6-99.9%) in detecting cases of forced sex, when compared to the SEM. Boys were less likely than girls to disclose in the FTFI, however there was no difference in prevalence by sex using the SEM (aOR = 0.91, 95%CI 0.7-1.2; P = 0.532). Disclosing experience of other forms of sexual violence was associated with experience of forced sex for both modes of disclosure. CONCLUSIONS: The SEM method was superior to FTFIs in identifying cases of forced sex amongst primary school children, particularly for boys. Reporting of other forms of sexual violence in FTFIs may indicate experience of forced sex. Future survey research, and efforts to estimate prevalence of sexual violence, should make use of more confidential disclosure methods to detect childhood sexual abuse.