Cargando…

Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare seekers around the globe use more than one healthcare system, with most using the traditional and the Western approaches concurrently. To date, little collaboration between the two systems has taken place within the mental health space compared with other areas of medicine....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jama, Ngcwalisa Amanda, Nyembezi, Anam, Lehmann, Uta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7805360/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33436474
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043452
_version_ 1783636294988988416
author Jama, Ngcwalisa Amanda
Nyembezi, Anam
Lehmann, Uta
author_facet Jama, Ngcwalisa Amanda
Nyembezi, Anam
Lehmann, Uta
author_sort Jama, Ngcwalisa Amanda
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Healthcare seekers around the globe use more than one healthcare system, with most using the traditional and the Western approaches concurrently. To date, little collaboration between the two systems has taken place within the mental health space compared with other areas of medicine. In order to inform integrating plans for traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners in the South African mental health system, it is important to know which models of collaboration are used in other medical settings and contexts. This study aims to document global evidence on collaboration practices between traditional health practitioners and biomedical professionals when working with various health conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be guided by an improved Arksey and O’Malley framework, the 2010 Levac et al methodological framework and the 2017 Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. A systematic literature search will be carried out using seven different databases, EMBASE, PubMed, LILACS MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, CINAHL Plus, Academic Search Complete and Scopus, in addition to the WHO repository, bibliographical search engines, and Open Access Theses and Dissertations. Moreover, the references of relevant publications between January 1978 and March 2020 will be scanned. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for eligibility based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Thematic analysis and descriptive numerical analysis will be performed using ATLAS.ti V.8 and Excel software, respectively. The results for this review will be presented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis: Extension for Scoping Review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will not require ethics approval because publicly available material will be used. Study findings will be published in an open-access journal and be presented to other key health system stakeholders and academic research gatherings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7805360
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78053602021-01-21 Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol Jama, Ngcwalisa Amanda Nyembezi, Anam Lehmann, Uta BMJ Open Public Health INTRODUCTION: Healthcare seekers around the globe use more than one healthcare system, with most using the traditional and the Western approaches concurrently. To date, little collaboration between the two systems has taken place within the mental health space compared with other areas of medicine. In order to inform integrating plans for traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners in the South African mental health system, it is important to know which models of collaboration are used in other medical settings and contexts. This study aims to document global evidence on collaboration practices between traditional health practitioners and biomedical professionals when working with various health conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be guided by an improved Arksey and O’Malley framework, the 2010 Levac et al methodological framework and the 2017 Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. A systematic literature search will be carried out using seven different databases, EMBASE, PubMed, LILACS MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, CINAHL Plus, Academic Search Complete and Scopus, in addition to the WHO repository, bibliographical search engines, and Open Access Theses and Dissertations. Moreover, the references of relevant publications between January 1978 and March 2020 will be scanned. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for eligibility based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Thematic analysis and descriptive numerical analysis will be performed using ATLAS.ti V.8 and Excel software, respectively. The results for this review will be presented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis: Extension for Scoping Review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will not require ethics approval because publicly available material will be used. Study findings will be published in an open-access journal and be presented to other key health system stakeholders and academic research gatherings. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-01-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7805360/ /pubmed/33436474 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043452 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Public Health
Jama, Ngcwalisa Amanda
Nyembezi, Anam
Lehmann, Uta
Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol
title Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol
title_full Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol
title_fullStr Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol
title_full_unstemmed Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol
title_short Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol
title_sort evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7805360/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33436474
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043452
work_keys_str_mv AT jamangcwalisaamanda evidenceofpastandcurrentcollaborationsbetweentraditionalhealthpractitionersandbiomedicalhealthpractitionersascopingreviewprotocol
AT nyembezianam evidenceofpastandcurrentcollaborationsbetweentraditionalhealthpractitionersandbiomedicalhealthpractitionersascopingreviewprotocol
AT lehmannuta evidenceofpastandcurrentcollaborationsbetweentraditionalhealthpractitionersandbiomedicalhealthpractitionersascopingreviewprotocol