Developing a toolkit for increasing the participation of black, Asian and minority ethnic communities in health and social care research.

BACKGROUND: It is recognised that Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) populations are generally underrepresented in research studies. The key objective of this work was to develop an evidence based, practical toolkit to help researchers maximise recruitment of BAME groups in research. METHODS: Development of the toolkit was an iterative process overseen by an expert steering group. Key steps included a detailed literature review, feedback from focus groups (including researchers and BAME community members) and further workshops and communication with participants to review the draft and final versions. RESULTS: Poor recruitment of BAME populations in research is due to complex reasons, these include factors such as inadequate attention to recruitment strategies and planning, poor engagement with communities and individuals due to issues such as cultural competency of researchers, historical poor experience of participating in research, and lack of links with community networks. Other factors include language issues, relevant expertise in research team and a lack of adequate resources that might be required in recruitment of BAME populations. CONCLUSIONS: A toolkit was developed with key sections providing guidance on planning research and ensuring adequate engagement of communities and individuals. Together with sections suggesting how the research team can address training needs and adopt best practice. Researchers highlighted the issue of funding and how best to address BAME recruitment in grant applications, so a section on preparing a grant application was also included. The final toolkit document is practical, and includes examples of best practice and 'top tips' for researchers.

A systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the prevalence of depression between people with and without Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: Diabetes can significantly impact quality of life and mental health. However, inconsistencies have been reported in the prevalence of depression in those with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, and those without. Systematic reviews also included studies without adequate control subjects. We update existing literature, by comparing depression prevalence between individuals with and without Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and PSYCHINFO, from January 1985 to August 2021. Studies were excluded if they failed to have an adequate control group, specified type of diabetes, or reported depression prevalence by type of diabetes. RESULTS: 44 studies were selected for inclusion. The prevalence of depression was significantly higher in people with Type 1 (22% vs 13%, OR = 2.10 (95% CI: 1.23, 3.52)), or Type 2 diabetes (19% vs 11%, OR = 1.76 (1.55, 2.01)) compared to those without diabetes. There was no association between study effect size and mean age or gender. Findings did not significantly differ between methods of depression assessment. Prevalence of depression in people with diabetes was higher in studies carried out in specialist care (36%, OR = 3.14 (2.12, 4.63)) compared to those in community or primary care (12%, OR = 1.51 (1.35, 1.70) and in low- and middle-income countries (OR = 2.58 (1.91, 3.50) compared to countries with high income economies (OR = 1.59 (1.39, 1.82)). CONCLUSIONS: Depression prevalence remains significant in those with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Effective chronic disease management in people with diabetes is important, particularly screening and managing depression and diabetes distress in specialist care settings.