The discourse about mental health problems among migrants and refugees tends to focus on adverse pre-migration experiences; there is less investigation of the environmental conditions in which refugee migrants live, and the contrasts between these situations in different countries. This cross-national study of two samples of Somali refugees living in London (UK) and Minneapolis, Minnesota, (USA) helps to fill a gap in the literature, and is unusual in being able to compare information collected in the same way in two cities in different countries.

Health care organizations need to be responsive to the needs of increasingly diverse patient populations. We compared the contents of six publicly available approaches to organizational responsiveness to diversity. The central questions addressed in this paper are: what are the most consistently recommended issues for health care organizations to address in order to be responsive to the needs of diverse groups that differ from the majority population? How much consensus is there between various approaches? We purposively sampled six approaches from the US, Australia and Europe and used qualitative textual analysis to categorize the content of each approach into domains (conceptually distinct topic areas) and, within each domain, into dimensions (operationalizations). The resulting classification framework was used for comparative analysis of the content of the six approaches. We identified seven domains that were represented in most or all approaches: organizational commitment, empirical evidence on inequalities and needs, a competent and diverse workforce, ensuring access for all users, ensuring responsiveness in care provision, fostering patient and community participation, and actively promoting responsiveness. Variations in the operationalization of these domains related to different scopes, contexts and types of diversity. For example, approaches that focus on ethnic diversity mostly provide recommendations to handle cultural and language differences; approaches that take an intersectional approach and broaden their target population to vulnerable groups in a more general sense also pay attention to factors such as socio-economic status and gender. Despite differences in labeling, there is a broad consensus about what health care organizations need to do in order to be responsive to patient diversity. This opens the way to full scale implementation of organizational responsiveness in healthcare and structured evaluation of its effectiveness in improving patient outcomes.

Within health systems, equity between migrants and native-born citizens is still a long way from being achieved. Benchmarking the equitability of policies on migrant health is essential for monitoring progress and identifying positive and negative aspects of national policies. For this purpose, the 2015 round of the Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) was expanded to include a strand on health, in a collaborative project carried out between 2013 and 2017 in 38 countries. Indicators of policies to promote equity were derived from the 2011 Recommendations of the Council of Europe on 'mobility, migration and access to health care' and used to construct a questionnaire compatible with MIPEX methodology. This yielded scores for Entitlement, Accessibility, Responsiveness and Measures to achieve change. As a measuring instrument, the questionnaire has a high degree of internal consistency, while exploratory factor analysis showed a coherent relationship between its statistical structure and the four scales it comprises. Measures to achieve change were strongly associated with Responsiveness, but not at all with Entitlements and only slightly with Accessibility. Examining the results from the sub-sample of 34 'European' countries, wide variations in the equitability of policies were found: these were mainly associated with a country's wealth (GDP), but differences between EU13 and EU15 countries were too extreme to explain completely in such terms. The MIPEX Health strand is a robust measurement tool that has already yielded a number of important results and is providing a valuable resource for both researchers and policy-makers.

Purpose – “Health literacy” refers to the knowledge and skills required to make optimal use of the health system. In the West, the question “how to live?” is increasingly answered by reference to medical and psychological norms and concepts: the concept of “health” has expanded enormously. Teaching migrants to become “health literate” is therefore a process of resocialisation or acculturation. If it is done without regard for their own ideas and values, it will be an attempt at assimilation – and like most such attempts, it will usually fail. If migrants are not consulted and involved in the design of their own health services, the services will not be optimally accessible and inclusive, which will lower the performance of the health system. This paper seeks to argue that becoming a “literate” user of Western health care involves learning a new morality. Design/methodology/approach – Evidence is presented to illustrate the increasing medicalisation and psychologisation of life in the West and the argument that concepts of health are value-based. Findings – Migrants are not empty vessels simply waiting to be filled up by Western expertise; they have their own ideas and values, which may clash with those that underlie health care. Integration of migrants into health systems can only take place through dialogue, in which both sides show respect for each other's views. The confrontation with other ideas and values can enrich mainstream health care in the West. Originality/value – The paper encourages readers to go beyond a purely technical interpretation of “health literacy” and consider its moral and political dimensions.

Persons affected by migration require health systems that are responsive and adaptable to the needs of both disadvantaged migrants and non-migrant populations. The objective of this study is to support health systems for populations affected by migration. Materials and Methods: An international Delphi consensus process was used to identify policy approaches to improve health systems for populations affected by migration. Participants were leading migrant health experts from Americas, Europe, Middle East, Asia, and Australasia. We calculated average ranking scores and qualitatively analyzed open-ended questions. Results: Participants identified the following key areas as priorities for policy development: health inequities, system discrimination, migrant related health data, disadvantaged migrant sub-groups, and considerations for disadvantaged non-migrant populations. Highly ranked items to improve health systems were: Health Equity Impact Assessment, evidence based guidelines, and the International Organization for Migration annual reports. Discussion: Policy makers need tools, data and resources to address health systems challenges. Policies need to avoid preventable deaths of migrants and barriers to basic health services.