Search

Afghan refugees child labourers face many challenges as they are labelled as refugees. In an attempt to explore these challenges, the present study was conducted in Tehran with a qualitative approach. The present qualitative research was conducted using a conventional content analysis approach with 25 Afghan child labourers in 2022 in Tehran. Child labourers were selected through purposive and snowball sampling and interviewed in a semi-in-depth interview. The data were analysed based on Granheim and Lundman's criteria, as well as those of Guba and Lincoln, to further enrich the findings. A total of 3 categories, 13 sub-categories, and 183 initial codes were extracted from the data analysis, including: "psychological challenges" (history of harassment and abuse, negative effects, high-risk behaviours, and family detachment); "health challenges" (physical problems, inappropriate accommodation, medical/therapeutic problems, and health threats); and "social challenges" (neglected childhood, dual identity, educational limitations, inadequate social support, social isolation, and social humiliation). At the individual level, it is possible to meet the child labourers' health needs and make them aware of the hazards of working in the streets through physical examination at certain intervals and holding training workshops on harassment prevention, anger control, prevention of high-risk behaviours, prevention of infectious diseases such as hepatitis, and strengthening self-confidence to improve health. Also, the Afghan child labourers' work could be intervened at the social and familial level by providing accommodation in more suitable neighbourhoods, providing health insurance for child labourers, creating the chances of studying in schools, preventing dropouts, and strengthening social relations in order to improve children's health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Induced abortion is one of the most common gynecological procedures in the world, with as many as three in every ten pregnancies ending in abortion. It, however, remains controversial. The objective of this scoping review was to explore and map existing literature on the experiences of those who provide abortion care. Methods and findings: This exploratory review followed the Levac et al. guidelines and was reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR checklist. CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, PsycInfo, PubMed, and Web of Science were used to identify peer-reviewed, original research articles published on providers' experience of abortion. We identified 106 relevant studies, which include a total sample of 4,250 providers from 28 countries and six continents. Most of the studies were qualitative (n = 83), though quantitative (n = 15) and mixed methods (n = 8) studies were also included. We identified two overarching themes: (1) Providers' experiences with abortion stigma and (2) Providers' reflections on their abortion work. Our findings suggest that providers from around the world experience challenges within society and their communities and workplaces which reinforce the stigmatization and marginalization of abortion and pose questions about the morality of this work. Most, however, are proud of their work, believe abortion care to be socially important and necessary, and remain committed to the provision of care. Conclusions: The findings of this review provide a comprehensive overview on the known experiences of providing abortion care. It is a key point of reference for international providers, researchers, and advocates to further this area of research or discussion in their own territories. The findings of this review will inform future work on how to support providers against stigmatization and will offer providers the chance to reflect on their own experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Very little is known about the practice-oriented challenges and potential response strategies for effective and efficient translation of informed consent and study prioritization in times of a pandemic. This stakeholder interview study aimed to identify the full spectrum of challenges and potential response strategies for informed consent and study prioritization in a pandemic setting. Methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with German stakeholders involved in clinical research during the COVID-19 pandemic. We continued sampling and thematic text analysis of interview transcripts until thematic saturation of challenges and potential response strategies was reached. Results: We conducted 21 interviews with investigators, oversight bodies, funders and research support units. For the first topic informed consent we identified three main themes: consent challenges, impact of consent challenges on clinical research, and potential strategies for consent challenges. For the second topic prioritization of clinical studies, we identified two main themes: perceived benefit of prioritization and potential strategies for prioritization. All main themes are further specified with subthemes. A supplementary table provides original quotes from the interviews for all subthemes. Discussion: Potential response strategies for challenges with informed consent and study prioritization partly share common ground. High quality procedures for study prioritization, for example, seem to be a core response strategy in dealing with informed consent challenges. Especially in a research environment with particularly high uncertainty regarding potential treatment effects and further limitations for valid informed consent should the selection of clinical trials be very well justified from a scientific, medical, and ethics viewpoint. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]