2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Scoping Review on Air Quality Monitoring, Policy and Health in West African Cities

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Ambient air pollution is a global health threat that causes severe mortality and morbidity from respiratory, cardiovascular, and other diseases. Its impact is especially concerning in cities; as the urban population increases, especially in low- and middle-income countries, large populations risk suffering from these health effects. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) comprises 15 West African countries, in which many cities are currently experiencing fast growth and industrialization. However, government-led initiatives in air quality monitoring are scarce in ECOWAS countries, which makes it difficult to effectively control and regulate air quality and subsequent health issues. A scoping study was performed following the Arksey and O’Malley methodological framework in order to assess the precise status of air quality monitoring, related policy, and legislation in this region. Scientific databases and gray literature searches were conducted, and the results were contrasted through expert consultations. It was found that only two ECOWAS countries monitor air quality, and most countries have insufficient legislation in place. Public health surveillance data in relation to air quality data is largely unavailable. In order to address this, improved air quality surveillance, stricter and better-enforced regulations, regional cooperation, and further research are strongly suggested for ECOWAS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

              Background Scoping studies are an increasingly popular approach to reviewing health research evidence. In 2005, Arksey and O'Malley published the first methodological framework for conducting scoping studies. While this framework provides an excellent foundation for scoping study methodology, further clarifying and enhancing this framework will help support the consistency with which authors undertake and report scoping studies and may encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process. Discussion We build upon our experiences conducting three scoping studies using the Arksey and O'Malley methodology to propose recommendations that clarify and enhance each stage of the framework. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question (stage one); balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process (stage two); using an iterative team approach to selecting studies (stage three) and extracting data (stage four); incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis, reporting results, and considering the implications of study findings to policy, practice, or research (stage five); and incorporating consultation with stakeholders as a required knowledge translation component of scoping study methodology (stage six). Lastly, we propose additional considerations for scoping study methodology in order to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research. Summary Specific recommendations to clarify and enhance this methodology are outlined for each stage of the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness and rigor of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                07 December 2020
                December 2020
                : 17
                : 23
                : 9151
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands; cmiral97@ 123456gmail.com
                [2 ]University Rennes, EHESP, CNRS, ARENES–UMR 6051, F-35000 Rennes, France; renaud.hourcade@ 123456ehesp.fr (R.H.); bertrand.lefebvre@ 123456ehesp.fr (B.L.)
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: eva.pilot@ 123456maastrichtuniversity.nl ; Tel.: +31-620311075
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8072-0475
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1463-4632
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3112-4447
                Article
                ijerph-17-09151
                10.3390/ijerph17239151
                7730241
                33297562
                660ec171-847a-49c5-967f-6aa551cd8203
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 02 November 2020
                : 03 December 2020
                Categories
                Review

                Public health
                urban air pollution,west africa,ecowas,public health,air quality monitoring,air quality standards

                Comments

                Comment on this article