Subsidence damage assessment of a Gothic church using differential interferometry and field data

The Santas Justa and Rufina Gothic church (fourteenth century) has suffered several physical, mechanical, chemical, and biochemical types of pathologies along its history: rock alveolization, efflorescence, biological activity, and capillary ascent of groundwater. However, during the last two decades, a new phenomenon has seriously affected the church: ground subsidence caused by aquifer overexploitation. Subsidence is a process that affects the whole Vega Baja of the Segura River basin and consists of gradual sinking in the ground surface caused by soil consolidation due to a pore pressure decrease. This phenomenon has been studied by differential synthetic aperture radar interferometry techniques, which illustrate settlements up to 100 mm for the 1993–2009 period for the whole Orihuela city. Although no differential synthetic aperture radar interferometry information is available for the church due to the loss of interferometric coherence, the spatial analysis of nearby deformation combined with fieldwork has advanced the current understanding on the mechanisms that affect the Santas Justa and Rufina church. These results show the potential interest and the limitations of using this remote sensing technique as a complementary tool for the forensic analysis of building structures.

A metasynthesis of qualitative studies regarding opinions and perceptions about barriers and determinants of health services’ accessibility in economic migrants

Background: Access to health services is an important health determinant. New research in health equity is required, especially amongst economic migrants from developing countries. Studies conducted on the use of health services by migrant populations highlight existing gaps in understanding which factors affect access to these services from a qualitative perspective. We aim to describe the views of the migrants regarding barriers and determinants of access to health services in the international literature (1997–2011). Methods: A systematic review was conducted for Qualitative research papers (English/Spanish) published in 13 electronic databases. A selection of articles that accomplished the inclusion criteria and a quality evaluation of the studies were carried out. The findings of the selected studies were synthesised by means of metasynthesis using different analysis categories according to Andersen’s conceptual framework of access and use of health services and by incorporating other emergent categories. Results: We located 3,025 titles, 36 studies achieved the inclusion criteria. After quality evaluation, 28 articles were definitively synthesised. 12 studies (46.2%) were carried out in the U.S and 11 studies (42.3%) dealt with primary care services. The participating population varied depending mainly on type of host country. Barriers were described, such as the lack of communication between health services providers and migrants, due to idiomatic difficulties and cultural differences. Other barriers were linked to the economic system, the health service characteristics and the legislation in each country. This situation has consequences for the lack of health control by migrants and their social vulnerability. Conclusions: Economic migrants faced individual and structural barriers to the health services in host countries, especially those with undocumented situation and those experimented idiomatic difficulties. Strategies to improve the structures of health systems and social policies are needed.

Looking twice at the gender equity index for public health impact

Background: It has been shown that gender equity has a positive impact on the everyday activities of people (decision making, income allocation, application and observance of norms/rules) which affect their health. Gender equity is also a crucial determinant of health inequalities at national level; thus, monitoring is important for surveillance of women’s and men’s health as well as for future health policy initiatives. The Gender Equity Index (GEI) was designed to show inequity solely towards women. Given that the value under scrutiny is equity, in this paper a modified version of the GEI is proposed, the MGEI, which highlights the inequities affecting both sexes. Methods: Rather than calculating gender gaps by means of a quotient of proportions, gaps in the MGEI are expressed in absolute terms (differences in proportions). The Spearman’s rank coefficient, calculated from country rankings obtained according to both indexes, was used to evaluate the level of concordance between both classifications. To compare the degree of sensitivity and obtain the inequity by the two methods, the variation coefficient of the GEI and MGEI values was calculated. Results: Country rankings according to GEI and MGEI values showed a high correlation (rank coef. = 0.95). The MGEI presented greater dispersion (43.8%) than the GEI (19.27%). Inequity towards men was identified in the education gap (rank coef. = 0.36) when using the MGEI. According to this method, many countries shared the same absolute value for education but with opposite signs, for example Azerbaijan (−0.022) and Belgium (0.022), reflecting inequity towards women and men, respectively. This also occurred in the empowerment gap with the technical and professional job component (Brunei:-0.120 vs. Australia, Canada Iceland and the U.S.A.: 0.120). Conclusion: The MGEI identifies and highlights the different areas of inequities between gender groups. It thus overcomes the shortcomings of the GEI related to the aim for which this latter was created, namely measuring gender equity, and is therefore of great use to policy makers who wish to understand and monitor the results of specific equity policies and to determine the length of time for which these policies should be maintained in order to correct long-standing structural discrimination against women.

Is health a right for all? An umbrella review of the barriers to health care access faced by migrants

Objective. To synthesise the scientific evidence concerning barriers to health care access faced by migrants. We sought to critically analyse this evidence with a view to guiding policies. Design. A systematic review methodology was used to identify systematic and scoping reviews which quantitatively or qualitatively analysed data from primary studies. The main variables analysed were structural and contextual barriers (health system organisation) as well as individual (patients and providers). The quality of evidence from the systematic reviews was critically appraised. From 2674 reviews, 79 were retained for further scrutiny, and finally 9 met the inclusion criteria. Results. The structural barriers identified were the lack of health insurance and the high cost of drugs (non-universal health system) and organisational aspects of health system (social insurance system and national health system). The individual barriers were linguistic and cultural. None of the reviews provided a quality appraisal of the studies. Conclusions. Barriers to health care for migrants range from entitlement in non-universal health systems to accessibility in universal ones, and determinants of access to the respective health services should be analysed within the corresponding national context. Generate social and institutional changes that eliminate barriers to access to health services is essential to ensure health for all.