Migrant and refugee youth perspectives on sexual and reproductive health and rights in Australia: a systematic review
Date
2022-12-02Author
Napier-Raman, Sharanya
Hossain, Syeda Zakia
Lee, Mi-Joung
Mpofu, Elias
Liamputtong, Pranee
Dune, Tinashe
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Migrant and refugee youth (MRY) in Australia face specific experiences that inform their sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). Migrant and refugee communities experience poor health outcomes and low service uptake. Additionally, youth are vulnerable to poor sexual health. This review examines the understandings and perspectives of MRY. A systematic review was conducted as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42021241213. Nine databases were systematically searched. Inclusion criteria specified literature reporting on migrant and/or refugee youth perspectives and attitudes towards sexual and reproductive health; peer-reviewed qualitative, mixed-methods and/or quantitative studies or grey literature reports; records using Australian research; literature published in English between January 2000 and March 2021. Records that did not report on MRY and did not examine participant views or perspectives; were abstract-only, reviews, pamphlets, protocols, opinion pieces or letters; did not include Australian research; were published before 2000 and/or in a language other than English were excluded. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool was used to assess studies’ methodological quality. Thematic synthesis methods guided data extraction and analysis. Twenty-eight papers were included in the final review. Three themes were identified in MRY constructions of SRHR: (1) experiences of silence and shame; (2) understandings of and responses to SRHR risks; (3) navigation of relationships and sexual activity. Socioecological factors shaped MRY perspectives at individual, interpersonal, institutional, and societal levels. Societal factors and interpersonal relationships significantly influenced decision making.