Background: Health systems resilience (HSR) research is a rapidly expanding field, in which key concepts are discussed and theoretical frameworks are emerging with vibrant debate. Fragile and conflict-affected settings (FCAS) are contexts exposed to compounding stressors, for which resilience is an important characteristic. However, only limited evidence has been generated in such settings. We conducted a scoping review to: (a) identify the conceptual frameworks of HSR used in the analysis of shocks and stressors in FCAS; (b) describe the representation of different actors involved in health care governance and service provision in these settings; and (c) identify health systems operations as they relate to absorption, adaptation, and transformation in FCAS. Methods: We used standard, extensive search methods. The search captured studies published between 2006 and January 2022. We included all peer reviewed and grey literature that adopted a HSR lens in the analysis of health responses to crises. Thematic analysis using both inductive and deductive approaches was conducted, adopting frameworks related to resilience characteristics identified by Kruk et al., and the resilience capacities described by Blanchet et al. Results: Thirty-seven studies met our inclusion criteria. The governance-centred, capacity-oriented framework for HSR emerged as the most frequently used lens of analysis to describe the health responses to conflict and chronic violence specifically. Most studies focused on public health systems’ resilience analysis, while the private health sector is only examined in complementarity with the former. Communities are minimally represented, despite their widely acknowledged role in supporting HSR. The documentation of operations enacting HSR in FCAS is focused on absorption and adaptation, while transformation is seldom described. Absorptive, adaptive, and transformative interventions are described across seven different domains: safety and security, society, health system governance, stocks and supplies, built environment, health care workforce, and health care services. Conclusions: Our review findings suggest that the governance-centred framework can be useful to better understand HSR in FCAS. Future HSR research should document adaptive and transformative strategies that advance HSR, particularly in relation to actions intended to promote the safety and security of health systems, the built environment for health, and the adoption of a social justice lens.

Aim The aim of this literature review was to identify the tools developed and used to assess orthorexia nervosa (ON). Methods A systematic search was executed in PubMed, Biomed Central, and PsycINFO. The final list included 70 articles that were critically analyzed. Results A total of six tools were reported to assess ON: the BOT, the ORTO-15, the EHQ, the DOS, the BOS, and the TOS. The tools were based upon different conceptualizations of ON and of its diagnostic criteria. Although they were different, all the conceptualizations derived from the initial definition of ON provided by Bratman in 1997. None of the methodologies adopted for tool construction considered end users or client perspectives and, when carried out, the validations of the tools were fragmented and often based on specific populations. Conclusion This study may be a starting point for the construction of a new diagnostic tool for ON. Starting from the methodological weaknesses identified by this review, it was possible to derive some suggestions for future research: (a) developing a modern re-conceptualization of ON, comprehensive of end-user perspectives; (b) adopting qualitative data collection techniques to gain insights into how to diagnose ON; and (c) actively involving diverse stakeholders for constructing a new tool. Level of evidence Level of Evidence: I, systematic review.

Background: Disasters have an unequal impact on the population because of differences in conditions of vulnerability, exposure, and capacity. Migrants and women are among the groups that are at greater risk for and disproportionately affected by disasters. However, despite the large body of evidence that analyzes their vulnerability separately, disaster research that targets migrant women is scant. The aim of this scoping review was to analyze the published scientific literature concerning the vulnerability of migrant women and the consequent negative impact they experience during disasters. Methods: A literature search was conducted on December 15th, 2021 on Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. No time filter was applied to the search. Information regarding the article’s main characteristics and design, migrant women and their migration experience, as well as about the type of disaster was collected. The factors responsible for the vulnerability of migrant women and the negative outcomes experienced during a disaster were extracted and inductively clustered in main themes reflecting several vulnerability pathways. The review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and relied on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Results: After full text review, 14 articles met the inclusion criteria. All of them adopted a qualitative methodology and focused on COVID-19. The pandemic negatively affected migrant women, by triggering numerous drivers that increased their level of exposure and vulnerability. Overall, six vulnerability factors have been identified: legal status, poverty conditions, pre-existing health conditions, limited agency, gender inequality and language and cultural barriers. These resulted in nine impacts: worsening of mental health status, poor access to care, worsening of physical health conditions, fraud, exacerbation of poverty, gender-based violence, jeopardization of educational path, and unfulfillment of their religious needs. Conclusions: This review provided an analysis of the vulnerability factors of migrant women and the pathways leading to negative outcomes during a disaster. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that health equity is a goal that is still far to reach. The post-pandemic era should constitute the momentum for thoroughly addressing the social determinants of health that systematically marginalize the most vulnerable groups.

Background: Migrants face several barriers when accessing care and tend to rely on emergency services to a greater extent than primary care. Comparing emergency department (ED) utilization by migrants and non-migrants can unveil inequalities affecting the migrant population and pave the way for public health strategies aimed at improving health outcomes. This systematic review aims to investigate differences in ED utilization between migrant and non-migrant populations to ultimately advance research on migrants’ access to care and inform health policies addressing health inequalities. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in March 2023 on the Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The included studies were limited to those relying on data collected from 2012 and written in English or Italian. Data extracted included information on the migrant population and the ED visit, the differences in ED utilization between migrants and non-migrants, and the challenges faced by migrants prior to, during, and after the ED visit. The findings of this systematic review are reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Results: After full-text review, 23 articles met the inclusion criteria. All but one adopted a quantitative methodology. Some studies reported a higher frequency of ED visits among migrants, while others a higher frequency among non-migrants. Migrants tend to leave the hospital against medical advice more frequently than the native population and present at the ED without consulting a general practitioner (GP). They are also less likely to access the ED via ambulance. Admissions for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions, namely health conditions for which adequate, timely, and effective outpatient care can prevent hospitalization, were higher for migrants, while still being significant for the non-migrant population. Conclusions: The comparison between migrants’ and non-migrants’ utilization of the ED did not suggest a clear pattern. There is no consensus on whether migrants access EDs more or less than non-migrants and on whether migrants are hospitalized at a higher or lower extent. However, migrants tend to access EDs for less urgent conditions, lack a referral from a GP and access the ED as walk-ins more frequently. Migrants are also discharged against medical advice more often compared to non-migrants. Findings of this systematic review suggest that migrants’ access to care is hindered by language barriers, poor insurance coverage, lack of entitlement to a GP, and lack of knowledge of the local healthcare system.

This study aims to include the perspective of those who share content about Orthorexia Nervosa (ON) on Instagram and self-diagnose with ON (SD-ON) to trace their development of ON, gain insights into risk factors, symptoms and recovery, and explore differences with those who do not SD-ON. This research used mixed methods, with a sequential explanatory design. The quantitative component (n = 185) aimed to identify biological, psychological, interpersonal, and contextual factors that play a role in each phase of ON development. The qualitative component (n = 10) aimed to probe how and why individuals who SD-ON feel that certain experiences have shaped their development of ON. Respondents defined ON an obsession with healthy eating and clean or pure foods, with unhealthy effects on physical, mental or social wellbeing. A minority of participants did not view ON as problematic, but as a "salvation" from chronic diseases. Three phases characterizing the development of ON were identified: onset, progression and help seeking. Regarding the onset, two routes were identified, both characterized by a snowball effect of interacting factors. Regarding the progression of ON, several symptoms were identified, with obsession with healthy eating being the most frequent one. The majority of participants were trying to lose weight during ON, but their rationale was health rather than appearance. Regarding the help-seeking phase, reasons for problem realization were identified. ON was not noticed by loved ones until major health problems occurred, this being a barrier for recovery. While most believed that recovery is possible, respondents agreed that ON is a condition that will always linger in the back of the mind. This study contributes to addressing the shortage of qualitative studies investigating ON from insiders' perspective.