Good or best practice statements: proposal for the operationalisation and implementation of GRADE guidance.

An evidence-based approach is considered the gold standard for health decision-making. Sometimes, a guideline panel might judge the certainty that the desirable effects of an intervention clearly outweigh its undesirable effects as high, but the body of supportive evidence is indirect. In such cases, the application of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach for grading the strength of recommendations is inappropriate. Instead, the GRADE Working Group has recommended developing ungraded best or good practice statement (GPS) and developed guidance under which circumsances they would be appropriate.Through an evaluation of COVID-1- related recommendations on the eCOVID Recommendation Map (COVID-19.recmap.org), we found that recommendations qualifying a GPS were widespread. However, guideline developers failed to label them as GPS or transparently report justifications for their development. We identified ways to improve and facilitate the operationalisation and implementation of the GRADE guidance for GPS.Herein, we propose a structured process for the development of GPSs that includes applying a sequential order for the GRADE guidance for developing GPS. This operationalisation considers relevant evidence-to-decision criteria when assessing the net consequences of implementing the statement, and reporting information supporting judgments for each criterion. We also propose a standardised table to facilitate the identification of GPS and reporting of their development. This operationalised guidance, if endorsed by guideline developers, may palliate some of the shortcomings identified. Our proposal may also inform future updates of the GRADE guidance for GPS.

PROTOCOL: Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Background Depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth doubled in the first year of the COVID‐19 pandemic. The COVID‐19 pandemic has created sustained disruption in society, schools, and universities, including increasing poverty and discrimination. Public health restrictions have caused isolation and reduced social and emotional support. Together, these factors make depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth a global public health emergency. Mobile applications (apps) have emerged as potentially scalable intervention to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth that could meet increased demands for mental health resources. Mobile apps may potentially reduce psychological distress with accessible technology‐based mental health resources. Objectives This systematic review and meta‐analysis aims to assess the effect of mobile apps on depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth. Search Methods We will develop a systematic search strategy in collaboration with an experienced librarian. We will search a series of databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL) from January 2008 to July 2021. Selection Criteria Following the PRISMA reporting guidelines for systematic reviews, two independent reviewers will identify eligible studies: randomized controlled trials on mobile apps for the management of depressive disorders (depression and anxiety) and alcohol use in youth aged 15–24 years of age. Data Collection and Analysis Eligible studies will be assessed for risk of bias, and outcomes pooled, when appropriate, for meta‐analysis. Heterogeneity, if present, will be examined for gender. ethnicity, and socioeconomic status contributions. A narrative synthesis will highlight similarities and differences between the included studies. We will report GRADE summary of finding tables.

Vaccines for all: A formative evaluation of a multistakeholder community-engaged COVID-19 vaccine outreach clinic for migrant communities.

Background: Racialized, low-income, and migrant populations experience persistent barriers to vaccines against COVID-19. These communities in East and Northeast Calgary were disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, yet faced vaccine access barriers. Diverse multi-stakeholder coalitions and community partnerships can improve vaccine outreach strategies, but how stakeholders perceive these models is unknown. Methods: We conducted a formative evaluation of a low-barrier, community-engaged vaccine outreach clinic in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, on June 5-6, 2021. We delivered an online post-clinic survey to clinic stakeholders, to assess whether the clinic achieved its collectively derived pre-specified goals (effective, efficient, patient-centered, and safe), to asses whether the clinic model was scalable, and to solicit improvement recommendations. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results: Overall, 166/195 (85%) stakeholders responded. The majority were from non-healthcare positions (59%), between 30 and 49 years of age (87/136; 64%), and self-identified as racialized individuals (96/136; 71%). Respondents felt the clinic was effective (99.2%), efficient (96.9%), patient-centered (92.3%), and safe (90.8%), and that the outreach model was scalable 94.6% (123/130). There were no differences across stakeholder categories. The open-ended survey responses supported the scale responses. Improvement suggestions describe increased time for clinic planning and promotion, more multilingual staff, and further efforts to reduce accessibility barriers, such as priority check-in for people with disabilities. Conclusion: Diverse stakeholders almost universally felt that this community-engaged COVID-19 vaccine outreach clinic achieved its goals and was scalable. These findings support the value of community-engaged outreach to improve vaccine equity among other marginalized newcomer communities.

Improving social justice in observational studies: protocol for the development of a global and Indigenous STROBE-equity reporting guideline.

BACKGROUND: Addressing persistent and pervasive health inequities is a global moral imperative, which has been highlighted and magnified by the societal and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Observational studies can aid our understanding of the impact of health and structural oppression based on the intersection of gender, race, ethnicity, age and other factors, as they frequently collect this data. However, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline, does not provide guidance related to reporting of health equity. The goal of this project is to develop a STROBE-Equity reporting guideline extension. METHODS: We assembled a diverse team across multiple domains, including gender, age, ethnicity, Indigenous background, disciplines, geographies, lived experience of health inequity and decision-making organizations. Using an inclusive, integrated knowledge translation approach, we will implement a five-phase plan which will include: (1) assessing the reporting of health equity in published observational studies, (2) seeking wide international feedback on items to improve reporting of health equity, (3) establishing consensus amongst knowledge users and researchers, (4) evaluating in partnership with Indigenous contributors the relevance to Indigenous peoples who have globally experienced the oppressive legacy of colonization, and (5) widely disseminating and seeking endorsement from relevant knowledge users. We will seek input from external collaborators using social media, mailing lists and other communication channels. DISCUSSION: Achieving global imperatives such as the Sustainable Development Goals (e.g., SDG 10 Reduced inequalities, SDG 3 Good health and wellbeing) requires advancing health equity in research. The implementation of the STROBE-Equity guidelines will enable a better awareness and understanding of health inequities through better reporting. We will broadly disseminate the reporting guideline with tools to enable adoption and use by journal editors, authors, and funding agencies, using diverse strategies tailored to specific audiences.

PROTOCOL: Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth doubled in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has created sustained disruption in society, schools, and universities, including increasing poverty and discrimination. Public health restrictions have caused isolation and reduced social and emotional support. Together, these factors make depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth a global public health emergency. Mobile applications (apps) have emerged as potentially scalable intervention to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth that could meet increased demands for mental health resources. Mobile apps may potentially reduce psychological distress with accessible technology-based mental health resources. Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the effect of mobile apps on depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth. Search Methods: We will develop a systematic search strategy in collaboration with an experienced librarian. We will search a series of databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL) from January 2008 to July 2021. Selection Criteria: Following the PRISMA reporting guidelines for systematic reviews, two independent reviewers will identify eligible studies: randomized controlled trials on mobile apps for the management of depressive disorders (depression and anxiety) and alcohol use in youth aged 15-24 years of age. Data Collection and Analysis: Eligible studies will be assessed for risk of bias, and outcomes pooled, when appropriate, for meta-analysis. Heterogeneity, if present, will be examined for gender. ethnicity, and socioeconomic status contributions. A narrative synthesis will highlight similarities and differences between the included studies. We will report GRADE summary of finding tables.

Knowledge mobilization activities to support decision-making by youth, parents, and adults using a systematic and living map of evidence and recommendations on COVID-19: protocol for three randomized controlled trials and qualitative user-experience studies.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic underlined that guidelines and recommendations must be made more accessible and more understandable to the general public to improve health outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate, quantify, and compare the public's understanding, usability, satisfaction, intention to implement, and preference for different ways of presenting COVID-19 health recommendations derived from the COVID-19 Living Map of Recommendations and Gateway to Contextualization (RecMap). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a multi-method study. Through an online survey, we will conduct pragmatic allocation-concealed, blinded superiority randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in three populations to test alternative formats of presenting health recommendations: adults, parents, and youth, with at least 240 participants in each population. Prior to initiating the RCT, our interventions will have been refined with relevant stakeholder input. The intervention arm will receive a plain language recommendation (PLR) format while the control arm will receive the corresponding original recommendation format as originally published by the guideline organizations (standard language version). Our primary outcome is understanding, and our secondary outcomes are accessibility and usability, satisfaction, intended behavior, and preference for the recommendation formats. Each population's results will be analyzed separately. However, we are planning a meta-analysis of the results across populations. At the end of each survey, participants will be invited to participate in an optional one-on-one, virtual semi-structured interview to explore their user experience. All interviews will be transcribed and analyzed using the principles of thematic analysis and a hybrid inductive and deductive approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Through Clinical Trials Ontario, the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board has reviewed and approved this protocol (Project ID: 3856). The University of Alberta has approved the parent portion of the trial (Project ID:00114894). Findings from this study will be disseminated through open-access publications in peer-reviewed journals and using social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05358990 . Registered on May 3, 2022.

Identifying Health Equity Factors That Influence the Public's Perception of COVID-19 Health Information and Recommendations: A Scoping Review.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted global public health and public trust in health recommendations. Trust in health information may waver in the context of health inequities. The objective of this scoping review is to map evidence on public perceptions of COVID-19 prevention information using the PROGRESS-Plus health equity framework. We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycInfo, and Embase databases from January 2020 to July 2021. We identified 792 citations and 31 studies published in 15 countries that met all inclusion criteria. The majority (30/31; 96.7%) of the studies used an observational design (74.2% cross-sectional, 16.1% cohort, 6.5% case study, 3.2% experimental trials). Most studies (61.3%) reported on perception, understanding, and uptake, and 35.5% reported on engagement, compliance, and adherence to COVID-19 measures. The most frequently reported sources of COVID-related information were social media, TV, news (newspapers/news websites), and government sources. We identified five important equity factors related to public trust and uptake of recommendations: education and health literacy (19 studies; 61.3%), gender (15 studies; 48.4%), age (15 studies; 48.4%), socioeconomic status (11 studies; 35.5%), and place of residence (10 studies; 32.3%). Our review suggests that equity factors play a role in public perception of COVID-19 information and recommendations. A future systematic review could be conducted to estimate the impact of equity factors on perception and behavior outcomes.

An evaluation of the COVID-19 recommendation map identified diverging clinical and public health guidance.

OBJECTIVES: To describe divergence between actionable statements issued by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) guideline developers cataloged on the "COVID-19 Recommendations and Gateway to Contextualization" platform. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We defined divergence as at least two comparable actionable statements with different explicit judgments of strength, direction, or subgroup consideration of the population or intervention. We applied a content analysis to compare guideline development methods for a sample of diverging statements and to evaluate factors associated with divergence. RESULTS: Of the 138 guidelines evaluated, 85 (62%) contained at least one statement that diverged from another guideline. We identified 223 diverging statements in these 85 guidelines. We grouped statements into 66 clusters. Each cluster addressed the same population, intervention, and comparator group or just similar interventions. Clinical practice statements were more likely to diverge in an explicit judgment of strength or direction compared to public health statements. Statements were more likely to diverge in strength than direction. The date of publication, used evidence, interpretation of evidence, and contextualization considerations were associated with divergence. CONCLUSION: More than half of the assessed guidelines issued at least one diverging statement. This study helps in understanding the types of differences between guidelines issuing comparable statements and factors associated with their divergence.

A multistakeholder development process to prioritize and translate COVID-19 health recommendations for patients, caregivers and the public. A case study of the COVID-19 recommendation map.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To develop a digital communication tool to improve the implementation of up-to-date COVID-19 recommendations. Specifically, to improve patient, caregiver and public understanding of healthcare recommendations on prevention, diagnoses and treatment. METHODS: Multi-stakeholder engagement design. In conjunction with the COVID-19 Recommendations and Gateway to Contextualization RecMap, we co-developed a stakeholder prioritization, drafting and editing process to enhance guideline communication and understanding. RESULTS: This paper presents the multi-stakeholder development process with three distinct plain language recommendation formats: formal recommendation, good practice statement, and additional guidance. Our case study of COVID-19 plain language recommendations PLRs addresses both public health interventions (e.g., vaccination, face masks) and clinical interventions (e.g., home pulse oximetry). CONCLUSION: This paper presents a novel approach to engaging stakeholders in improving the communication and understanding of published guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Which actionable statements qualify as good practice statements In Covid-19 guidelines? A systematic appraisal.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the development and quality of actionable statements that qualify as good practice statements (GPS) reported in COVID-19 guidelines. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review . We searched MEDLINE, MedSci, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), databases of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Guidelines, NICE, WHO and Guidelines International Network (GIN) from March 2020 to September 2021. We included original or adapted recommendations addressing any COVID-19 topic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We used GRADE Working Group criteria for assessing the appropriateness of issuing a GPS: (1) clear and actionable; (2) rationale necessitating the message for healthcare practice; (3) practicality of systematically searching for evidence; (4) likely net positive consequences from implementing the GPS and (5) clear link to the indirect evidence. We assessed guideline quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. RESULTS: 253 guidelines from 44 professional societies issued 3726 actionable statements. We classified 2375 (64%) as GPS; of which 27 (1%) were labelled as GPS by guideline developers. 5 (19%) were labelled as GPS by their authors but did not meet GPS criteria. Of the 2375 GPS, 85% were clear and actionable; 59% provided a rationale necessitating the message for healthcare practice, 24% reported the net positive consequences from implementing the GPS. Systematic collection of evidence was deemed impractical for 13% of the GPS, and 39% explained the chain of indirect evidence supporting GPS development. 173/2375 (7.3%) statements explicitly satisfied all five criteria. The guidelines' overall quality was poor regardless of the appropriateness of GPS development and labelling. CONCLUSIONS: Statements that qualify as GPS are common in COVID-19 guidelines but are characterised by unclear designation and development processes, and methodological weaknesses.

Health Equity Implications of the COVID-19 Lockdown and Visitation Strategies in Long-Term Care Homes in Ontario: A Mixed Method Study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the lives and well-being of long-term care home residents. This mixed-method study examined the health equity implications of the COVID-19 lockdown and visitation strategies in long-term care homes in Ontario. We recruited long-term care home residents, their family members and designated caregivers, as well as healthcare workers from 235 homes in Ontario, Canada. We used online surveys and virtual interviews to assess the priority, feasibility, and acceptability of visitation strategies, and to explore the lived experiences of participants under the lockdown and thereafter. A total of n = 201 participants completed a survey and a purposive sample of n = 15 long-term care home residents and their family members completed an interview. The initial lockdown deteriorated residents' physical, mental, and cognitive well-being, and disrupted family and community ties. Transitional visitation strategies, such as virtual visits, were criticised for lack of emotional value and limited feasibility. Designated caregiver programs emerged as a prioritised and highly acceptable strategy, one that residents and family members demanded continuous and unconditional access to. Our findings suggest a series of equity implications that highlight a person-centred approach to visitation strategies and promote emotional connection between residents and their loved ones.

How Are Non-Medical Settlement Service Organizations Supporting Access to Healthcare and Mental Health Services for Immigrants: A Scoping Review.

Following resettlement in high-income countries, many immigrants and refugees experience barriers to accessing primary healthcare. Local non-medical settlement organizations, such as the Local Immigration Partnerships in Canada, that support immigrant integration, may also support access to mental health and healthcare services for immigrant populations. This scoping review aims to identify and map the types and characteristics of approaches and interventions that immigrant settlement organizations undertake to support access to primary healthcare for clients. We systematically searched MEDLINE, Social Services Abstracts, CINAHL, and PsycInfo databases from 1 May 2013 to 31 May 2021 and mapped research findings using the Social-Ecological Model. The search identified 3299 citations; 10 studies met all inclusion criteria. Results suggest these organizations support access to primary healthcare services, often at the individual, relationship and community level, by collaborating with health sector partners in the community, connecting clients to health services and service providers, advocating for immigrant health, providing educational programming, and initiating community development/mobilization and advocacy activities. Further research is needed to better understand the impact of local non-medical immigrant settlement organizations involved in health care planning and service delivery on reducing barriers to access in order for primary care services to reach marginalized, high-need immigrant populations.

Mental Health Screening Approaches for Resettling Refugees and Asylum Seekers: A Scoping Review.

Refugees and asylum seekers often face delayed mental health diagnoses, treatment, and care. COVID-19 has exacerbated these issues. Delays in diagnosis and care can reduce the impact of resettlement services and may lead to poor long-term outcomes. This scoping review aims to characterize studies that report on mental health screening for resettling refugees and asylum seekers pre-departure and post-arrival to a resettlement state. We systematically searched six bibliographic databases for articles published between 1995 and 2020 and conducted a grey literature search. We included publications that evaluated early mental health screening approaches for refugees of all ages. Our search identified 25,862 citations and 70 met the full eligibility criteria. We included 45 publications that described mental health screening programs, 25 screening tool validation studies, and we characterized 85 mental health screening tools. Two grey literature reports described pre-departure mental health screening. Among the included publications, three reported on two programs for women, 11 reported on programs for children and adolescents, and four reported on approaches for survivors of torture. Programs most frequently screened for overall mental health, PTSD, and depression. Important considerations that emerged from the literature include cultural and psychological safety to prevent re-traumatization and digital tools to offer more private and accessible self-assessments.

Vaccines alone will not prevent COVID-19 outbreaks among migrant workers-the example of meat processing plants.

BACKGROUND: Migrant populations in high-income countries have faced myriad health and social inequities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Migrants often work in frontline essential services that expose them to COVID-19. Migrant workers in meat processing plants have endured large COVID-19 outbreaks across multiple countries. OBJECTIVES: We examine current scientific evidence around COVID-19 transmission, outcomes, and prevention for migrant workers and highlight meat processing plants as an example. SOURCES: We performed a series of PubMed searches between January 1, 2020 and January 12, 2022. CONTENT: Migrant workers in high-income countries often work in occupations at high risk for COVID-19 transmission, contract COVID-19 at higher rates, and experience worse outcomes than native-born counterparts. For example, meat processing plants represent almost ideal environments for rapid and large-scale SARS-CoV-2 viral transmission; often, large migrant workforces confined to small workspaces perform physically demanding work in noisy environments that require shouting to communicate, increasing workers' respiratory rates and the quantity of aerosolized droplets expelled and thus increasing viral transmission risk. Although enhanced vaccination outreach programs remain an important equity approach for migrant worker safety, they alone are insufficient. The emergence and rapid spread of multiple increasingly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern with variable vaccine escape properties, including Omicron in November 2021, highlight the importance of improved infection prevention and control strategies to protect migrant workers. Across countries, strategies such as improving ventilation and mask quality in many high-risk occupational settings are already required by employment law. Universal mandatory vaccination program should also be considered. IMPLICATIONS: COVID-19 transmission prevention for migrant workers requires an aggressive multicomponent plan that includes (a) improved on-site ventilation and infection prevention and control strategies; (b) improved social supports such as paid sick leave; (c) mobile vaccination clinics and community engagement to overcome vaccine hesitancy and barriers; and (d) consideration of universal mandatory vaccination programs.

Mobile interventions targeting common mental disorders among pregnant and postpartum women: An equity-focused systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnant and postpartum women face major psychological stressors that put them at higher risk of developing common mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety. Yet, their limited access to and uptake of traditional mental health care is inequitable, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mobile interventions emerged as a potential solution to this discontinued healthcare access, but more knowledge is needed about their effectiveness and impact on health equity. This equity-focused systematic review examined the effectiveness and equity impact of mobile interventions targeting common mental disorders among pregnant and postpartum women. METHODS AND RESULTS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and 3 other databases, from date of database inception and until January 2021, for experimental studies on mobile interventions targeting pregnant and postpartum women. We used pooled and narrative synthesis methods to analyze effectiveness and equity data, critically appraised the methodological rigour of included studies using Cochrane tools, and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Our search identified 6148 records, of which 18 randomized and non-randomized controlled trials were included. Mobile interventions had a clinically important impact on reducing the occurrence of depression (OR = 0.51 [95% CI 0.41 to 0.64]; absolute risk reduction RD: 7.14% [95% CI 4.92 to 9.36]; p<0.001) and preventing its severity perinatally (MD = -3.07; 95% CI -4.68 to -1.46; p<0.001). Mobile cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was effective in managing postpartum depression (MD = -6.87; 95% CI -7.92 to -5.82; p<0.001), whereas other support-based interventions had no added benefit. Results on anxiety outcomes and utilization of care were limited. Our equity-focused analyses showed that ethnicity, age, education, and being primiparous were characteristics of influence to the effectiveness of mobile interventions. CONCLUSION: As the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the need for virtual mental health care, mobile interventions show promise in preventing and managing common mental disorders among pregnant and postpartum women. Such interventions carry the potential to address health inequity but more rigorous research that examines patients' intersecting social identities is needed.

A taxonomy and framework for identifying and developing actionable statements in guidelines suggests avoiding informal recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To propose a taxonomy and framework that identifies and presents actionable statements in guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We took an iterative approach reviewing case studies of guidelines produced by the World Health Organization and the American Society of Hematology to develop an initial conceptual framework. We then tested it using randomly selected recommendations from published guidelines addressing COVID-19 from different organizations, evaluated its results, and refined it before retesting. The urgency and availability of evidence for development of these recommendations varied. We consulted with experts in research methodology and guideline developers to improve the final framework. RESULTS: The resulting taxonomy and framework distinguishes five types of actional statements: formal recommendations; research recommendations; good practice statements; implementation considerations, tools and tips; and informal recommendations. These statements should respond to a priori established criteria and require a clear structure and recognizable presentation in a guideline. Most importantly, this framework identifies informal recommendations that differ from formal recommendations by how they consider evidence and in their development process. CONCLUSION: The identification, standardization and explicit labelling of actionable statements according to the framework may support guideline developers to create actionable statements with clear intent, avoid informal recommendations and improve their understanding and implementation by users.

Interventions fondées sur des données probantes et pratiques exemplaires en matière de soutien apporté aux femmes en situation ou à risque d’itinérance : examen de la portée avec analyse fondée sur le sexe et l’équité

[Image omitted;see PDF] Source : Reproduction autorisée de la figure de Schwan K, Versteegh A, Perri M, Caplan R, Baig K, Dej E, et al., Huit défis clés et occasions de changement, p. 6. En ligne à : http://womenshomelessness.ca/wp-content/uploads/WG_ES1_FRENCH-1.pdf Une analyse des données du recensement canadien de 2014 a révélé que plus d’un million de femmes ont déclaré avoir été en situation d’itinérance cachée à un moment de leur vie, situation souvent associée à des expériences négatives vécues pendant l’enfance, à des réseaux sociaux faibles et à des milieux de vie comprenant diverses identités de genre 6. Dans le cadre d’une initiative plus vaste visant à élaborer des lignes directrices de pratique clinique pour offrir du soutien aux personnes itinérantes au Canada 19 20, un processus de consensus par méthode Delphi modifiée 21 a été utilisé pour s’assurer que les femmes en situation d’itinérance figurent parmi les populations prioritaires. Notre article vise à examiner les interventions fondées sur des données probantes et les pratiques exemplaires spécialement conçues pour soutenir les femmes en situation ou à risque d’itinérance, afin d’élaborer une approche plus efficace et mieux adaptée aux besoins particuliers de ces femmes.

Caring for refugees and newcomers in the post-COVID-19 era: Evidence review and guidance for FPs and health providers.

OBJECTIVE: To guide clinicians working in a range of primary care clinical settings on how to provide effective care and support for refugees and newcomers during and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: The described approach integrates recommendations from evidence-based clinical guidelines on refugee health and COVID-19, practical lessons learned from Canadian Refugee Health Network clinicians working in a variety of primary care settings, and contributions from persons with lived experience of forced migration. MAIN MESSAGE: The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified health and social inequities for refugees, asylum seekers, undocumented migrants, transient migrant workers, and other newcomers. Refugees and newcomers face front-line exposure risks, difficulties accessing COVID-19 testing, exacerbation of mental health concerns, and challenges accessing health care, social, and settlement supports. Existing guidelines for clinical care of refugees are useful, but creative case-by-case strategies must be employed to overcome additional barriers in the context of COVID-19 and new care environments, such as the need for virtual interpretation and digital literacy skills. Clinicians can address inequities and advocate for improved services in collaboration with community partners. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic is amplifying structural inequities. Refugees and newcomers require and deserve effective health care and support during this challenging time. This article outlines practical approaches and advocacy priorities for providing care in the COVID-19 context.

Soigner les réfugiés et les nouveaux arrivants à l'ère post-COVID-19: Revue des données probantes et conseils pour les MF et les professionnels de la santé.

OBJECTIF: Guider les cliniciens qui travaillent dans divers milieux cliniques de soins primaires quant aux façons de prodiguer des soins et du soutien efficaces aux réfugiés et aux nouveaux arrivants, durant et après la pandémie de la maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). SOURCES D'INFORMATION: L'approche décrite intègre les recommandations tirées de guides de pratique clinique fondés sur des données probantes portant sur la santé des réfugiés et la COVID-19, de leçons concrètes apprises de cliniciens du Réseau canadien sur la santé des réfugiés (Canadian Refugee Health Network) qui travaillent dans divers milieux de soins primaires, ainsi que de contributions de personnes ayant vécu l'expérience d'une migration forcée. MESSAGE PRINCIPAL: La pandémie de la COVID-19 a amplifié les iniquités sociales et de santé pour les réfugiés, les demandeurs d'asile, les migrants sans papiers, les travailleurs transitoires de l'étranger et d'autres nouveaux arrivants. Les réfugiés et les nouveaux arrivants sont confrontés à des risques d'exposition en première ligne, à des problèmes d'accès aux tests de dépistage de la COVID-19, à l'exacerbation des préoccupations liées à la santé mentale, et aux difficultés d'accéder aux soins de santé et aux services sociaux et d'établissement. Les lignes directrices existantes sur les soins cliniques aux réfugiés sont utiles, mais des stratégies créatives au cas par cas doivent être utilisées pour surmonter les obstacles additionnels dans le contexte de la COVID-19 et des nouveaux environnements de soins, comme la nécessité d'une traduction simultanée virtuelle et d'habiletés en littératie numérique. Les cliniciens peuvent lutter contre les iniquités et plaider en faveur de meilleurs services en collaboration avec des partenaires communautaires. CONCLUSION: La pandémie de la COVID-19 amplifie les iniquités structurelles. Les réfugiés et les nouveaux arrivants nécessitent et méritent des soins de santé et du soutien efficaces durant ces moments éprouvants. Cet article présente des approches pratiques et les priorités en matière de défense des droits pour offrir des soins dans le contexte de la COVID-19.