Strategies to Increase Filipino American Participation in Cardiovascular Health Promotion: A Systematic Review
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW — Volume 15 — May 17, 2018
PEER REVIEWED
A total of 347 records were identified through database searching, and 5 additional records were identified through other sources. After duplicate articles were removed and others screened, 344 articles remained. After 309 records were excluded, 35 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 26 were excluded (8 were not peer reviewed, 9 were descriptive studies, and 9 were not focused on Filipino Americans). Nine articles were included in the qualitative synthesis.
Figure 1.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart for article selection, review of articles on increasing Filipino Amercian participation in cardiovascular disease prevention programs, United States, 2004–2016.
Figure 2 plots the selected articles by using the Spencer grid. Quality assessment scores are on the x axis, and total impact scores are on the y axis. The quality assessment score is the total number of quality criteria of 9 total that were met by the study (<5 = limited quality, 5–7 = fair quality, 8–9 = good quality). The total impact score is the mean of effectiveness, reach, feasibility, sustainability, and transferability scores for the intervention (<2 = low impact, 2–3 = moderate impact, <3 = high impact).
Figure 2.
Graph of intervention efficacy according to the Spencer grid (21), review of articles on increasing Filipino Amercian participation in cardiovascular disease prevention programs, United States, 2004–2016. The quality assessment score is the total number of quality criteria of 9 total that were met by the study (<5 = limited quality, 5–7 = fair quality, 8–9 = good quality). The total impact score is the mean of effectiveness, reach, feasibility, sustainability, and transferability scores for the intervention (<2 = low impact, 2–3 = moderate impact, >3 = high impact).
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions.