Healthcare utilization among urbanized syrian refugees in Jordan: exploring access, needs, barriers and adaptation strategies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Since the Syria crisis started, about one quarter of its population have fled to the neighbouring \ncountries, mainly Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. Jordan has hosted more than 12% of the \nrefugees from Syria and numbers are increasing. This increase in migration and refugee either \ndue to long-lasting conflicts or ongoing economic crises has made the refugee movement a \nconcern at global level and prompted hosting countries, as well as humanitarian organisations \nto respond to this alarming crisis. The study explores the access to and utilization of healthcare \nservices among urbanized Syrian refugees in Jordan. Using the mixed method design, this \nphenomenon was studied among two refugees’ communities urbanized in central governorates. \nThe study settings were selected conveniently, the participant sample for the quantitative part \nwere randomly chosen while sampling was purposive for the qualitative part. A cross-sectional \nsurvey among 383 refugees aged 18 – 75 years old was conducted between November 2019 \nand January 2020. Participants answers were entered directly using on tablet using KOBO tool. \nConcurrently, in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted among a subset of twenty \nparticipants. Data were analyzed with descriptive and thematic analysis, while quantitative data \nwere analyzed with descriptive statistical analysis, qualitative data were transcribed and \nanalysed using Braun and Clarke thematic analysis approach. \nBoth dataset analyses identified a set of fragmented needs in relation to health needs and help \nseeking, such as emergency care, psychological-mental support needs, rehabilitation, disability, \nelderly care, childcare, women's care, and chronic disease care. The analysis of seeking \nbehaviour found that primary awareness, beliefs, access policy, financial capacities and practice \nare the main drivers for health-seeking behaviours. The standard barriers quantified through \nquantitative assessment were cost, awareness, quality of services and discrimination. The \nqualitative assessment detected the same access barriers in addition to access policy, service availability, waiting time and distance. The standard adaptation strategies quantified by \nquantitative assessment were a theme in qualitative findings. These include seeking free \nservices, delaying seeking care, reducing, or stopping the use of medication, using alternative \nmedicine, borrowing money or use saving, and moving onward. However, the qualitative \nassessment also detected adaptation strategies included self-medication, collection donation, \nillegal labour, and prioritising between health and other livelihood needs. Four themes found \nunder the impact of adaptation strategies include psychological and mental health \nconsequences, compromise of other livelihood needs, deterioration of health status and legal \nconsequences. \nThe perceived needs, seeking behaviours, and experienced barriers with healthcare interacts \nwith each other. Another contextual set-up, inform Syrian refugees’ healthcare utilization \nbehaviours, drive adaptation strategies and result in a negative impact on refugee health status, \nbut also may extend to another means of livelihood. The study’s findings may be relevant to \nthe global responses to the refugee crisis. The hosting countries can use it to develop a balanced \nresponse regarding health interventions and policies to avoid negative consequences on \nrefugees and host communities. Additionally, the third countries that received the secondary \nmovement of refugees may use these findings to enhance support to host countries for better \naccommodation for refugees' needs and avoid unnecessary subsequent movements that pose \nadditional global health and other risks.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».