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 for an extended scoping review on the use of virtual nominal group technique in research.

INTRODUCTION: Consensus group methods such as the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) and Delphi method are commonly used in research to elicit and synthesize expert opinions when evidence is lacking. Traditionally, the NGT involves a face-to-face interaction. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many in-person meetings have moved to online settings. It is unclear to what extent the NGT has been undertaken in virtual settings. The overarching aim of this scoping review is to explore the use of the virtual NGT in research. Our specific objectives are to answer the following questions: To what extent has the NGT been used virtually? What modifications were made to accommodate this online format? What advantages and disadvantages were noted by authors in comparison with the face-to-face mode of the technique? MATERIALS AND METHODS: This scoping review will follow the steps outlined by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Several pilot searches were completed to refine inclusion and exclusion criteria. Media Synchronicity Theory will provide a conceptual framework to inform the research, including data extraction and summarizing results. As an additional extension to the literature review, online interviews with corresponding authors will be conducted to gather further information.

Leading through the first wave of COVID: a Canadian action research study.

PURPOSE: This first phase of a three-phase action research project aims to define leadership practices that should be used during and after the pandemic to re-imagine and rebuild the health and social care system. Specifically, the objectives were to determine what effective leadership practices Canadian health leaders have used through the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, to explore how these differ from pre-crisis practices; and to identify what leadership practices might be leveraged to create the desired health and care systems of the future. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors used an action research methodology. In the first phase, reported here, the authors conducted one-on-one, virtual interviews with 18 health leaders from across Canada and across leadership roles. Data were analyzed using grounded theory methodology. FINDINGS: Five key practices emerged from the data, within the core dimension of disrupting entrenched structures and leadership practices. These were, namely, responding to more complex emotions in self and others. Future practice identified to create more psychologically supportive workplaces. Agile and adaptive leadership. Future practice should allow leaders to move systemic change forward more quickly. Integrating diverse perspectives, within and across organizations, leveling hierarchies through bringing together a variety of perspectives in the decision-making process and engaging people more broadly in the co-creation of strategies. Applying existing leadership capabilities and experience. Future practice should develop and expand mentorship to support early career leadership. Communication was increased to build credibility and trust in response to changing and often contradictory emerging evidence and messaging. Future practice should increase communication. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The project was limited to health leaders in Canada and did not represent all provinces/territories. Participants were recruited through the leadership networks, while diverse, were not demographically representative. All interviews were conducted in English; in the second phase of the study, the authors will recruit a larger and more diverse sample and conduct interviews in both English and French. As the interviews took place during the early stages of the pandemic, it may be that health leaders' views of what may be required to re-define future health systems may change as the crisis shifts over time. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The sponsoring organization of this research - the Canadian Health Leadership Network and each of its individual member partners - will mobilize knowledge from this research, and subsequent phases, to inform processes for leadership development and, succession planning across, the Canadian health system, particularly those attributes unique to a context of crisis management but also necessary in post-crisis recovery. SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This research has shown that there is an immediate need to develop innovative and influential leadership action - commensurate with its findings - to supporting the evolution of the Canadian health system, the emotional well-being of the health-care workforce, the mental health of the population and challenges inherent in structural inequities across health and health care that discriminate against certain populations. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: An interdisciplinary group of health researchers and decision-makers from across Canada who came together rapidly to examine leadership practices during COVID-19's first wave using action research study design.

The relevance of the LEADS framework during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 has created a unique context for the practice of leadership in healthcare. Given the significant use of the LEADS in a Caring Environment capabilities framework (LEADS) in Canada's health system, it is important to document the relevancy of LEADS. The authors reviewed literature, conducted research, and reflected on their own experience to identify leadership practices during the pandemic and related them to LEADS. Findings are presented in three sections: Hindsight (before), Insight (during), and Foresight (post). We profile the issue of improving long-term Care to provide an example of how LEADS can be applied in crisis times. Our analysis suggests that while LEADS appears to specify the leadership capabilities needed, it requires adaptation to context. The vision Canada has for healthcare will dictate how LEADS will be used as a guide to leadership practice in the current context or to shape a bolder vision of healthcare's future.

Improving Social Justice in COVID-19 Health Research: Interim Guidelines for Reporting Health Equity in Observational Studies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the global imperative to address health inequities. Observational studies are a valuable source of evidence for real-world effects and impacts of implementing COVID-19 policies on the redistribution of inequities. We assembled a diverse global multi-disciplinary team to develop interim guidance for improving transparency in reporting health equity in COVID-19 observational studies. We identified 14 areas in the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) checklist that need additional detail to encourage transparent reporting of health equity. We searched for examples of COVID-19 observational studies that analysed and reported health equity analysis across one or more social determinants of health. We engaged with Indigenous stakeholders and others groups experiencing health inequities to co-produce this guidance and to bring an intersectional lens. Taking health equity and social determinants of health into account contributes to the clinical and epidemiological understanding of the disease, identifying specific needs and supporting decision-making processes. Stakeholders are encouraged to consider using this guidance on observational research to help provide evidence to close the inequitable gaps in health outcomes.