Dataset Information

Research- and health-related youth advisory groups in Canada: An environmental scan with stakeholder interviews.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Engaging youth throughout the research process improves research quality and outcomes. Youth advisory groups provide one way for youth to express their opinions on relevant issues.

Objective

This study aimed to identify research- and health-related youth advisory groups ('groups') in Canada and understand the best practices of these groups.

Methods

Google searches and supplementary methods were used to identify relevant groups in Canada. Group information was extracted from websites or through interviews with key informants.

Results

We identified 40 groups. Groups were commonly part of a hospital/healthcare facility, nonprofit/health organization or research group. The majority focused on a specific content area, most commonly, mental health. Over half the groups advised on health services. Members' ages ranged from 9 to 35 years. The number of members ranged from 5 to 130. Interviews (n = 12) identified seven categories relating to group practices: (a) group purpose/objectives, (b) group development, (c) group operations, (d) group structure, (e) adult involvement, (f) membership and recruitment and (g) group access. Challenges and facilitators to the success of groups were described within the following themes: (a) retaining engagement, (b) creating a safe environment and (c) putting youth in positions of influence. Advice and recommendations were provided regarding the development of a new group.

Conclusion

This study provides a comprehensive overview of research- and health-related youth advisory groups in Canada. This information can be used to identify groups that stakeholders could access as well as inform the development of a new group.

Patient or public contribution

Youth advisory group representatives were interviewed as part of the study.

SUBMITTER: Chan M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8483214 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Research- and health-related youth advisory groups in Canada: An environmental scan with stakeholder interviews.

Chan Michelle M Scott Shannon D SD Campbell Alyson A Elliott Sarah A SA Brooks Hannah H Hartling Lisa L

Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 20210719 5

<h4>Background</h4>Engaging youth throughout the research process improves research quality and outcomes. Youth advisory groups provide one way for youth to express their opinions on relevant issues.<h4>Objective</h4>This study aimed to identify research- and health-related youth advisory groups ('groups') in Canada and understand the best practices of these groups.<h4>Methods</h4>Google searches and supplementary methods were used to identify relevant groups in Canada. Group information was ext ...[more]

PMID: 34288282

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe inclusion of stakeholders throughout the research process has been gaining recognition as an approach that can improve the quality and impact of research. Stakeholder engagement for dementia care research has been identified as a national priority, though evaluation of engagement strategies and their impact has been limited. In dementia care research, stakeholders can include individuals living with dementia, family care partners, and health and social care professionals in dementia care. A Stakeholder Advisory Council (SAC) was established to identify priorities for dementia care research that are most important to stakeholders. Strategies to build capacity for research and facilitate engagement among the SAC were used to identify the research priorities. This study describes the experiences of SAC members engaged in the research process.MethodsTo evaluate stakeholder engagement, semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the SAC to understand their experiences and perspectives on the strategies used to facilitate engagement and build capacity for research. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed using a mixed inductive and deductive approach. Findings were presented to members of the SAC to determine whether they felt their perspectives and experiences were accurately represented. Final domains and themes presented here were approved by the SAC.ResultsInterviews (N = 11) were conducted with members of the SAC representing each stakeholder group; persons living with dementia (n = 2); family care partners (n = 4), and health and social care professionals in dementia care (n = 5). Ten themes were categorized into four overarching domains: accessibility, council infrastructure, values and environment, and benefits of involvement.ConclusionsFindings from this qualitative study are a resource for researchers seeking to collaborate with diverse stakeholder groups to represent their perspectives in research, including individuals living with dementia. The domains and themes identified here support the inclusion of diverse stakeholders in the research process, centering engagement and capacity building strategies around individuals living with dementia.

Project description:BackgroundMany countries are currently rethinking their global health research funding priorities. When resources are limited, it is important to understand and use information about existing research strengths to inform research strategies and investments and to drive impact. This study describes a method to rapidly assess a country's global health research expertise and applies this method in the Canadian context.MethodsWe developed a three-pronged rapid environmental scan to evaluate Canadian global health research expertise that focused on research funding inputs, research activities and research outputs. We assessed research funding inputs from Canada's national health research funding agency and identified the 30 Canadian universities that received the most global health research funding. We systematically searched university websites and secondary databases to identify research activities, including research centres, research chairs and research training programmes. To evaluate research outputs, we searched PubMed to identify global health research publications by Canadian university-affiliated researchers. We used these three perspectives to develop a more nuanced understanding of Canadian strengths in global health research from different perspectives.ResultsCanada's main global health research funder, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, invested a total of $314 M from 2000 to 2016 on global health research grants. This investment has contributed to Canada's wealth of global health research expertise, including 12 training programmes, 27 Canada Research Chairs, 6 research centres and 30 WHO Collaborating Centres across 27 universities. Research activities were concentrated in Canada's biggest cities and most commonly focused on health equity and globalisation issues. Canadian-affiliated researchers have contributed to a research output of 822 unique publications on PubMed. There is an opportunity to build global health expertise in regions not already concentrated with research activity, focusing on transnational risks and neglected conditions research.ConclusionsOur three-pronged approach allowed us to rapidly identify clear geographic and substantive areas of strength in Canadian global health research, including urban regions and research focused on health equity and globalisation topics. This information can be used to support research policy directives, including to inform a Canadian global health research strategy, and to allow relevant academic institutions and funding organisations to make more strategic decisions regarding their future investments.

Project description:ObjectivesThe increase in global wildland fire activity has accelerated the urgency to understand health risks associated with wildland fire suppression. The aim of this project was to identify occupational health research priorities for wildland firefighters and related personnel.DesignIn order to identify, rank and rate health research priorities, we followed a modified Delphi approach. Data collection involved a two-stage online survey followed by semi-structured interviews.SettingBritish Columbia, Canada.ParticipantsParticipants included any current or past wildland firefighter or individuals engaged in related roles. There were 132 respondents to the first survey. Responses to the first survey were analysed to produce 10 research topics which were ranked by 75 participants in the second survey (response rate: 84%).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the identification, ranking and level of agreement of research priorities through a two-round online survey. We contextualised these findings through deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis of semi-structured interviews.ResultsThe most important research priorities identified were (% consensus): effects of smoke inhalation on respiratory health (89%), fatigue and sleep (80%), mental health (78%), stress (76%) and long-term risk of disease (67%). Interviews were completed with 14 individuals. Two main themes were developed from an inductive content analysis of interview transcripts: (1) understanding the dynamic risk environment; and (2) organisational fit of mitigation strategies.ConclusionsParticipants expressed a general concern with the unknown mental and physical health impacts of their jobs, including the long-term risk of morbidity and mortality. Future research must address knowledge gaps in our understanding of the health impacts of wildland fire and work to develop appropriate mitigation strategies while considering the needs of workers and unpredictable workplace environment.Trial registration numberOpen Science Framework, https://osf.io/ugz4s/.

Project description:Background/Objectives: The World Federation of the Deafblind Global Report 2023 reports that many countries do not have a comprehensive identification, assessment, and referral system for persons with deafblindness, a combination of hearing and vision loss, across all age groups and geographic regions. The scan seeks to inform researchers, policymakers, and community-based organizations about the status of and gaps in sensory healthcare initiatives in Canada, with the intent to raise awareness to enhance the integration and coordination of eye and ear care services. Methods: We conducted an environmental scan of Canada's healthcare system and current public health policies addressing vision and hearing care in Canada at the federal and provincial levels. The scan was conducted using published literature searches from five scientific databases-Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed, and CINAHL-in combination with the gray literature review of federal, provincial, and territorial governments and non-profit organizations' websites from April 2011-October 2022. Out of 1257 articles screened, 86 studies were included that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. In total, 13 reports were included in the gray literature search, with 99 total articles used in the analysis. Results: The thematic findings indicate stigma and discrimination toward individuals with disabilities and marginalized communities (Indigenous people, rural communities, recent immigrants, people of older age, and people with disabilities), including hearing, vision, or dual sensory loss, persist. Barriers to vision and hearing healthcare access include inadequate policies, underinvestment in vision and/or hearing services, limited collaboration and coordinated services between hearing and vision services, discrepancies in insurance coverages, and lack of health system support. Conclusions: This scan demonstrates the persisting barriers to vision and/or hearing services present in Canada, stemming from inadequate policy and limited service coordination. Future work to address gaps, evaluate public education, and develop integrated sensory healthcare initiatives to enhance coordinated eye and ear care services, as recommended in the WHO Report on Hearing and Vision, is imperative.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding treatment options is important for patients with cancer and their caregivers. This may be difficult, however, because oncology treatments are often approved based on complex clinical endpoints. The study aimed to explore lay understanding of oncology clinical endpoints by assessing the definitions of clinical endpoints available online and gathering qualitative focus group data on cancer survivors' and the general public's understanding of clinical endpoints.MethodsWe conducted an environmental scan to find Web sites accessible by a general audience that defined three clinical endpoints: overall survival, progression-free survival, and response rate. Next, we conducted a series of eight focus groups across the U.S. with cancer survivors (n = 36) and general population adults (n = 36).ResultsWe found several online resources defining each endpoint; however, many of the definitions we identified used technical language that may not be easily understood by patients and caregivers. Few focus group participants were familiar with the technical terms for these endpoints. When presented with the endpoint terms and definitions, participants had misconceptions about treatment efficacy. Specifically, they tended to expect that all endpoints were a variation on living longer.ConclusionThe results point to the need for more patient-friendly definitions of clinical endpoints developed with input from the general public and from patients with cancer.Implications for practiceAs the number of oncology prescription drug approvals and the advertising of those drugs to consumers increase, it is timely and critical to understand how to discuss treatment benefits with patients. Patient-friendly definitions of common clinical endpoints, such as overall survival and progression-free survival, would help health care providers describe treatment benefits to patients. This research provides evidence regarding patients' understanding of these endpoints and suggests definitions for additional research. This represents a first step in creating evidence-based patient-friendly language to describe clinical endpoints.

Project description:BackgroundPoorly supported transitions from pediatric to adult healthcare can lead to negative health outcomes for youth and their families. To better understand the current landscape of healthcare transition care across Canada, the Canadian Health Hub in Transition (the "Transition Hub", established in 2019) identified a need to: (1) describe programs and services supporting the transition from pediatric to adult healthcare across Canada; and (2) identify strengths, barriers, and gaps affecting the provision of transition services.MethodsOur project included two iterative steps: a national survey followed by a qualitative descriptive study. Service providers were recruited from the Transition Hub and invited to complete the survey and participate in the qualitative study. The survey was used to collect program information (e.g., setting, clinical population, program components), and semi-structured interviews were used to explore providers' perspectives on strengths, barriers, and gaps in transition services. Qualitative data were analyzed using the Framework Method.ResultsFifty-one surveys were completed, describing 48 programs (22 pediatric, 19 bridging, and 7 adult) across 9 provinces. Almost half of the surveyed programs were in Ontario (44%) and most programs were based in hospital (65%) and outpatient settings (73%). There was wide variation in the ages served, with most programs focused on specific diagnostic groups. Qualitative findings from 23 interviews with service providers were organized into five topics: (1) measuring transition success; (2) program strengths; (3) barriers and gaps; (4) strategies for improvement; and (5) drivers for change.ConclusionsWhile national transition guidelines exist in Canada, there is wide variation in the way young people and their families are supported. A national strategy, backed by local leadership, is essential for instigating system change toward sustainable and universally accessible support for healthcare transition in Canada.

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify, characterise and map the existing knowledge about programmes that provide immunisation support to Canadians and barriers and facilitators to their delivery.DesignScoping review and environmental scan.IntroductionVaccine hesitancy may be associated with unmet support needs of individuals. Immunisation support programmes that provide multicomponent approaches can improve vaccine confidence and equitable access.Inclusion criteriaCanadian programmes that focus on providing information about immunisation for the general public, but excluding articles targeting health professionals. The primary concept involves mapping the characteristics of programmes and our secondary concept examines barriers and facilitators to programme delivery.MethodsThe Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology guided this review, reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. A search strategy was developed and translated for six databases in November 2021 (updated October 2022). Unpublished literature was identified through the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health Grey Matters checklist and other relevant sources. Stakeholders (n=124) from Canadian regional health authorities were also contacted by email for publicly accessible information. Two independent raters screened and extracted data from identified material. Results are presented in tabular form.ResultsThe search strategy and environmental scan resulted in 15 287 sources. A total of 161 full-text sources were reviewed after applying eligibility criteria, resulting in 50 articles. Programmes were delivered in multiple Canadian provinces, focusing on various vaccine types. All programmes aimed to increase vaccine uptake and were mostly provided in person. Multidisciplinary delivery teams based on collaborations among multiple entities were credited as a facilitator to programme delivery across settings. Limitations on programme resources, attitudes of programme staff and participants, and systems organisation were identified as barriers to delivery.ConclusionsThis review highlighted characteristics of immunisation support programmes across various settings and described multiple facilitators and barriers. These findings can inform future interventions that aim to support Canadians in making decisions about immunisation.

Dataset Information

Research- and health-related youth advisory groups in Canada: An environmental scan with stakeholder interviews.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Patient or public contribution

Publications

Research- and health-related youth advisory groups in Canada: An environmental scan with stakeholder interviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets