Scoping Review to Identify Social Determinants of Maternal Health in Morocco

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

To understand the mechanism of health inequities and their influence on maternal health, the Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) provides a framework to identify structural and intermediate causes of health inequity. This review maps and describes the current socioeconomic determinants of maternal health in Morocco according to the CSDH framework. A scoping study was carried out from six databases (Springer, Web of Science, Pubmed, Science Direct, Jstor, and Cochrane library) based on quantitative and qualitative research done since 1990. Structural factors such as women's employment and economic status, education level, culture, and gender equity were influenced by intermediary factors such as place of residence, age at marriage, maternal age at childbirth, and parity (either alone or in conjunction with other variables). Together these factors worked to influence maternal health service usage or affected maternal health outcomes. Power dynamics were identified in a variety of social situations that impacted access to health care for women across socioeconomic categories. Studies reveal how social determinants impact maternal health in Morocco. Addressing these determinants is required for sustainably improving maternal and infant health in Morocco.

Related collections

Most cited references 21

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

Danielle Levac, Heather Colquhoun, Kelly K. O’Brien (2010)

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.

0 comments Cited 3384 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews

Andrea Tricco, Erin Lillie, Wasifa Zarin … (2016)

Background Scoping reviews are used to identify knowledge gaps, set research agendas, and identify implications for decision-making. The conduct and reporting of scoping reviews is inconsistent in the literature. We conducted a scoping review to identify: papers that utilized and/or described scoping review methods; guidelines for reporting scoping reviews; and studies that assessed the quality of reporting of scoping reviews. Methods We searched nine electronic databases for published and unpublished literature scoping review papers, scoping review methodology, and reporting guidance for scoping reviews. Two independent reviewers screened citations for inclusion. Data abstraction was performed by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative (e.g. frequencies of methods) and qualitative (i.e. content analysis of the methods) syntheses were conducted. Results After searching 1525 citations and 874 full-text papers, 516 articles were included, of which 494 were scoping reviews. The 494 scoping reviews were disseminated between 1999 and 2014, with 45 % published after 2012. Most of the scoping reviews were conducted in North America (53 %) or Europe (38 %), and reported a public source of funding (64 %). The number of studies included in the scoping reviews ranged from 1 to 2600 (mean of 118). Using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology guidance for scoping reviews, only 13 % of the scoping reviews reported the use of a protocol, 36 % used two reviewers for selecting citations for inclusion, 29 % used two reviewers for full-text screening, 30 % used two reviewers for data charting, and 43 % used a pre-defined charting form. In most cases, the results of the scoping review were used to identify evidence gaps (85 %), provide recommendations for future research (84 %), or identify strengths and limitations (69 %). We did not identify any guidelines for reporting scoping reviews or studies that assessed the quality of scoping review reporting. Conclusion The number of scoping reviews conducted per year has steadily increased since 2012. Scoping reviews are used to inform research agendas and identify implications for policy or practice. As such, improvements in reporting and conduct are imperative. Further research on scoping review methodology is warranted, and in particular, there is need for a guideline to standardize reporting. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

0 comments Cited 497 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Views of Ethical Best Practices in Sharing Individual-Level Data From Medical and Public Health Research

Nia Roberts (2015)

There is increasing support for sharing individual-level data generated by medical and public health research. This scoping review of empirical research and conceptual literature examined stakeholders’ perspectives of ethical best practices in data sharing, particularly in low- and middle-income settings. Sixty-nine empirical and conceptual articles were reviewed, of which, only five were empirical studies and eight were conceptual articles focusing on low- and middle-income settings. We conclude that support for sharing individual-level data is contingent on the development and implementation of international and local policies and processes to support ethical best practices. Further conceptual and empirical research is needed to ensure data sharing policies and processes in low- and middle-income settings are appropriately informed by stakeholders’ perspectives.

0 comments Cited 44 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Chaimae Moujahid: (View ORCID Profile)

Journal

Title: International Journal of Social Determinants of Health and Health Services

Abbreviated Title: International Journal of Social Determinants of Health and Health Services

Publisher: SAGE Publications

ISSN (Print): 2755-1938

ISSN (Electronic): 2755-1946

Publication date Created: April 2024

Publication date (Electronic): November 30 2023

Publication date (Print): April 2024

Volume: 54

Issue: 2

Pages: 151-162

Affiliations

[1 ]Biomedical Technologies, Sciences and Technologies of Health, Higher Institute of Health Sciences, Hassan First University of Settat, Settat, Morocco

[2 ]Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA

Article

DOI: 10.1177/27551938231217589

SO-VID: a70e6010-dea8-4717-9e4c-169d9b0cb086

License:

https://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.