Canada's cannabis legalization and police-reported cannabis-related criminal incidents among youth, 2015-2021.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported that the 2018 Canadian Cannabis Act, allowing youth to possess up to 5 g dried cannabis or equivalent for personal use/sharing, was associated with short-term (76 days) post-legalization reduction in police-reported cannabis-related crimes among youth. To establish whether the change might be sustained, we now estimate this association during a much longer time period by including an additional three years of post-legalization data. METHODS: Using national daily police-reported criminal incident data from January 1, 2015-December 31, 2021 from the Canadian Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR-2), the study employed Seasonal Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (SARIMA) time series models to assess the associations between legalization and youth (12-17 years) cannabis-related offenses (male, n = 34,508; female, n = 9529). RESULTS: Legalization was associated with significant reductions in both male and female police-reported cannabis-related offenses: females, 4.04 daily incidents [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.08; 5.01], a 62.1% decrease [standard error (se), 34.3%]; males, 12.42 daily offenses (95% CI, 8.99; 15.86), a reduction of 53.0% (se, 22.7%). There was no evidence of associations between cannabis legalization and patterns of property or violent crimes. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the impact of the Cannabis Act on reducing cannabis-related youth crimes is sustained, supporting the Act's objectives to reduce cannabis-related criminalization among youth and associated effects on the Canadian criminal justice system.

Navigating conflicting value systems: a grounded theory of the process of public health equity work in the context of mental health promotion and prevention of harms of substance use.

BACKGROUND: Promoting health equity and reducing heath inequities is a foundational aim and ethical imperative in public health. There has been limited attention to and research on the ethical issues inherent in promoting health equity and reducing health inequities that public health practitioners experience in their work. The aim of the study was to explore how public health providers identified and navigated ethical issues and their management related to promoting health equity within services focused on mental health promotion and preventing harms of substance use. METHODS: Semi-structured individual interviews and focus groups were conducted with 32 public health practitioners who provided public-health oriented services related to mental health promotion and prevention of substance use harms (e.g. harm reduction) in one Canadian province. RESULTS: Participants engaged in the basic social process of navigating conflicting value systems. In this process, they came to recognize a range of ethically challenging situations related to health equity within a system that held values in conflict with health equity. The extent to which practitioners recognized, made sense of, and acted on these fundamental challenges was dependent on the degree to which they had developed a critical public health consciousness. Ethically challenging situations had impacts for practitioners, most importantly, the experiences of responding emotionally to ethical issues and the experience of living in dissonance when working to navigate ethical issues related to promoting health equity in their practice within a health system based in biomedical values. CONCLUSIONS: There is an immediate need for practice-oriented tools for recognizing ethical dilemmas and supporting ethical decision making related to health equity in public health practice in the context of mental health promotion and prevention of harms of substance use. An increased focus on understanding public health ethical issues and working collaboratively and reflexively to address the complexity of equity work has the potential to strengthen equity strategies and improve population health.

Putting On and Taking Off the Capulana: A Grounded Theory of How Mozambican Women Manage Gender Oppression.

Gender-based oppression is a pervasive global challenge, but has taken a back seat to other issues in Mozambique. The purpose of this grounded theory study was to explore how Mozambican women manage multiple oppressions in their lives in the context of the AIDS epidemic. Using interviews, documents, and constant comparison, we constructed a theory, Putting on and Taking Off the Capulana, to explain how women are socialized into and push back against the prevailing societal misogyny. The theory comprises four categories: Putting on the Capulana, Turning a Blind Eye, Playing the Game, and Taking Off the Capulana. Women adopt sex-role expectations, becoming socialized into patriarchal society. They are silent about their oppression, and society colludes in this. They use a strategic process to gain a sense of control over their situations. Finally, some women develop a critical consciousness and are able to resist their oppression in emancipatory ways.

"The health equity curse": ethical tensions in promoting health equity.

BACKGROUND: Public health (PH) practitioners have a strong moral commitment to health equity and social justice. However, PH values often do not align with health systems values, making it challenging for PH practitioners to promote health equity. In spite of a growing range of PH ethics frameworks and theories, little is known about ethical concerns related to promotion of health equity in PH practice. The purpose of this paper is to examine the ethical concerns of PH practitioners in promoting health equity in the context of mental health promotion and prevention of harms of substance use. METHODS: As part of a broader program of public health systems and services research, we interviewed 32 PH practitioners. RESULTS: Using constant comparative analysis, we identified four systemic ethical tensions: [1] biomedical versus social determinants of health agenda; [2] systems driven agendas versus situational care; [3] stigma and discrimination versus respect for persons; and [4] trust and autonomy versus surveillance and social control. CONCLUSIONS: Naming these tensions provides insights into the daily ethical challenges of PH practitioners and an opportunity to reflect on the relevance of PH frameworks. These findings highlight the value of relational ethics as a promising approach for developing ethical frameworks for PH practice.

Values are not enough: qualitative study identifying critical elements for prioritization of health equity in health systems.

BACKGROUND: Health system policies and programs that reduce health inequities and improve health outcomes are essential to address unjust social gradients in health. Prioritization of health equity is fundamental to addressing health inequities but challenging to enact in health systems. Strategies are needed to support effective prioritization of health equity. METHODS: Following provincial policy recommendations to apply a health equity lens in all public health programs, we examined health equity prioritization within British Columbia health authorities during early implementation. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews and focus groups with 55 senior executives, public health directors, regional directors, and medical health officers from six health authorities and the Ministry of Health. We used an inductive constant comparative approach to analysis guided by complexity theory to determine critical elements for prioritization. RESULTS: We identified seven critical elements necessary for two fundamental shifts within health systems. 1) Prioritization through informal organization includes creating a systems value for health equity and engaging health equity champions. 2) Prioritization through formal organization requires explicit naming of health equity as a priority, designating resources for health equity, requiring health equity in decision making, building capacity and competency, and coordinating a comprehensive approach across levels of the health system and government. CONCLUSIONS: Although creating a shared value for health equity is essential, health equity - underpinned by social justice - needs to be embedded at the structural level to support effective prioritization. Prioritization within government and ministries is necessary to facilitate prioritization at other levels. All levels within health systems should be accountable for explicitly including health equity in strategic plans and goals. Dedicated resources are needed for health equity initiatives including adequate resourcing of public health infrastructure, training, and hiring of staff with equity expertise to develop competencies and system capacity.

Addressing quadruple aims through primary care and public health collaboration: ten Canadian case studies.

BACKGROUND: Health systems in Canada and elsewhere are at a crossroads of reform in response to rising economic and societal pressures. The Quadruple Aim advocates for: improving patient experience, reducing cost, advancing population health and improving the provider experience. It is at the forefront of Canadian reform debates aimed to improve a complex and often-fragmented health care system. Concurrently, collaboration between primary care and public health has been the focus of current research, looking for integrated community-based primary health care models that best suit the health needs of communities and address health equity. This study aimed to explore the nature of Canadian primary care - public health collaborations, their aims, motivations, activities, collaboration barriers and enablers, and perceived outcomes. METHODS: Ten case studies were conducted in three provinces (Nova Scotia, Ontario, and British Columbia) to elucidate experiences of primary care and public health collaboration in different settings, contexts, populations and forms. Data sources included a survey using the Partnership Self-Assessment Tool, focus groups, and document analysis. This provided an opportunity to explore how primary care and public health collaboration could serve in transforming community-based primary health care with the potential to address the Quadruple Aims. RESULTS: Aims of collaborations included: provider capacity building, regional vaccine/immunization management, community-based health promotion programming, and, outreach to increase access to care. Common precipitators were having a shared vision and/or community concern. Barriers and enablers differed among cases. Perceived barriers included ineffective communication processes, inadequate time for collaboration, geographic challenges, lack of resources, and varying organizational goals and mandates. Enablers included clear goals, trusting and inclusive relationships, role clarity, strong leadership, strong coordination and communication, and optimal use of resources. Cases achieved outcomes addressing the Q-Aims such as improving access to services, addressing population health through outreach to at-risk populations, reducing costs through efficiencies, and improving provider experience through capacity building. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care and public health collaborations can strengthen community-based primary health care while addressing the Quadruple Aims with an emphasis on reducing health inequities but requires attention to collaboration barriers and enablers.

Health equity-oriented approaches to inform responses to opioid overdoses: a scoping review protocol.

REVIEW QUESTION/OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this scoping review is to systematically identify and describe literature that uses a health equity-oriented (HEO) approach for preventing and reducing the harms of stigma or overdose for people who use illicit drugs or misuse prescription opioids.The question of the review is: What is currently known about the use of an HEO approach for preventing the harms of stigma or overdose when people use illicit or street drugs, or use prescription opioids for other than their intended purposes?Specifically, the review objectives are.

What Is Missing from "Patient-Oriented Research?" A View from Public Health Systems and Services.

Patient-oriented research (POR) aims to increase patient engagement in health research to improve health research and health services. In Canada, the Strategies for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) framework provides guidance for conducting POR. We critically review the SPOR framework through the lens of public health systems and services research. The SPOR framework is primarily focused on engaging individual patients in health research without attention to broader structural forces that shape health and participation in healthcare systems. Shifting from patient to public involvement and from patient to community engagement and being explicit about the range of health research that SPOR encompasses would enhance the framework and strengthen the potential of SPOR to improve health systems through health protection, promotion and prevention of disease and injury.

Organizational factors influencing successful primary care and public health collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Public health and primary care are distinct sectors within western health care systems. Within each sector, work is carried out in the context of organizations, for example, public health units and primary care clinics. Building on a scoping literature review, our study aimed to identify the influencing factors within these organizations that affect the ability of these health care sectors to collaborate with one another in the Canadian context. Relationships between these factors were also explored. METHODS: We conducted an interpretive descriptive qualitative study involving in-depth interviews with 74 key informants from three provinces, one each in western, central and eastern Canada, and others representing national organizations, government, or associations. The sample included policy makers, managers, and direct service providers in public health and primary care. RESULTS: Seven major organizational influencing factors on collaboration were identified: 1) Clear Mandates, Vision, and Goals; 2) Strategic Coordination and Communication Mechanisms between Partners; 3) Formal Organizational Leaders as Collaborative Champions; 4) Collaborative Organizational Culture; 5) Optimal Use of Resources; 6) Optimal Use of Human Resources; and 7) Collaborative Approaches to Programs and Services Delivery. CONCLUSION: While each influencing factor was distinct, the many interactions among these influences are indicative of the complex nature of public health and primary care collaboration. These results can be useful for those working to set up new or maintain existing collaborations with public health and primary care which may or may not include other organizations.

Critical considerations for the practical utility of health equity tools: a concept mapping study.

BACKGROUND: Promoting health equity within health systems is a priority and challenge worldwide. Health equity tools have been identified as one strategy for integrating health equity considerations into health systems. Although there has been a proliferation of health equity tools, there has been limited attention to evaluating these tools for their practicality and thus their likelihood for uptake. METHODS: Within the context of a large program of research, the Equity Lens in Public Health (ELPH), we conducted a concept mapping study to identify key elements and themes related to public health leaders and practitioners' views about what makes a health equity tool practical and useful. Concept mapping is a participatory mixed-method approach to generating ideas and concepts to address a common concern. Participants brainstormed responses to the prompt "To be useful, a health equity tool should…" After participants sorted responses into groups based on similarity and rated them for importance and feasibility, the statements were analyzed using multidimensional scaling, then grouped using cluster analysis. Pattern matching graphs were constructed to illustrate the relationship between the importance and feasibility of statements, and go-zone maps were created to guide subsequent action. RESULTS: The process resulted in 67 unique statements that were grouped into six clusters: 1) Evaluation for Improvement; 2) User Friendliness; 3) Explicit Theoretical Background; 4) Templates and Tools 5) Equity Competencies; and 6) Nothing about Me without Me- Client Engaged. The result was a set of concepts and themes describing participants' views of the practicality and usefulness of health equity tools. CONCLUSIONS: These thematic clusters highlight the importance of user friendliness and having user guides, templates and resources to enhance use of equity tools. Furthermore, participants' indicated that practicality was not enough for a tool to be useful. In addition to practical characteristics of the tool, a useful tool is one that encourages and supports the development of practitioner competencies to engage in equity work including critical reflections on power and institutional culture as well as strategies for the involvement of community members impacted by health inequities in program planning and delivery. The results of this study will be used to inform the development of practical criteria to assess health equity tools for application in public health.

Strengthening primary health care through primary care and public health collaboration: the influence of intrapersonal and interpersonal factors.

AimThe aim of this paper is to examine Canadian key informants' perceptions of intrapersonal (within an individual) and interpersonal (among individuals) factors that influence successful primary care and public health collaboration. BACKGROUND: Primary health care systems can be strengthened by building stronger collaborations between primary care and public health. Although there is literature that explores interpersonal factors that can influence successful inter-organizational collaborations, a few of them have specifically explored primary care and public health collaboration. Furthermore, no papers were found that considered factors at the intrapersonal level. This paper aims to explore these gaps in a Canadian context. METHODS: This interpretative descriptive study involved key informants (service providers, managers, directors, and policy makers) who participated in one h telephone interviews to explore their perceptions of influences on successful primary care and public health collaboration. Transcripts were analyzed using NVivo 9.FindingsA total of 74 participants [from the provinces of British Columbia (n=20); Ontario (n=19); Nova Scotia (n=21), and representatives from other provinces or national organizations (n=14)] participated. Five interpersonal factors were found that influenced public health and primary care collaborations including: (1) trusting and inclusive relationships; (2) shared values, beliefs and attitudes; (3) role clarity; (4) effective communication; and (5) decision processes. There were two influencing factors found at the intrapersonal level: (1) personal qualities, skills and knowledge; and (2) personal values, beliefs, and attitudes. A few differences were found across the three core provinces involved. There were several complex interactions identified among all inter and intra personal influencing factors: One key factor - effective communication - interacted with all of them. Results support and extend our understanding of what influences successful primary care and public health collaboration at these levels and are important considerations in building and sustaining primary care and public health collaborations.

What systemic factors contribute to collaboration between primary care and public health sectors? An interpretive descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Purposefully building stronger collaborations between primary care (PC) and public health (PH) is one approach to strengthening primary health care. The purpose of this paper is to report: 1) what systemic factors influence collaborations between PC and PH; and 2) how systemic factors interact and could influence collaboration. METHODS: This interpretive descriptive study used purposive and snowball sampling to recruit and conduct interviews with PC and PH key informants in British Columbia (n = 20), Ontario (n = 19), and Nova Scotia (n = 21), Canada. Other participants (n = 14) were knowledgeable about collaborations and were located in various Canadian provinces or working at a national level. Data were organized into codes and thematic analysis was completed using NVivo. The frequency of "sources" (individual transcripts), "references" (quotes), and matrix queries were used to identify potential relationships between factors. RESULTS: We conducted a total of 70 in-depth interviews with 74 participants working in either PC (n = 33) or PH (n = 32), both PC and PH (n = 7), or neither sector (n = 2). Participant roles included direct service providers (n = 17), senior program managers (n = 14), executive officers (n = 11), and middle managers (n = 10). Seven systemic factors for collaboration were identified: 1) health service structures that promote collaboration; 2) funding models and financial incentives supporting collaboration; 3) governmental and regulatory policies and mandates for collaboration; 4) power relations; 5) harmonized information and communication infrastructure; 6) targeted professional education; and 7) formal systems leaders as collaborative champions. CONCLUSIONS: Most themes were discussed with equal frequency between PC and PH. An assessment of the system level context (i.e., provincial and regional organization and funding of PC and PH, history of government in successful implementation of health care reform, etc) along with these seven system level factors could assist other jurisdictions in moving towards increased PC and PH collaboration. There was some variation in the importance of the themes across provinces. British Columbia participants more frequently discussed system structures that could promote collaboration, power relations, harmonized information and communication structures, formal systems leaders as collaboration champions and targeted professional education. Ontario participants most frequently discussed governmental and regulatory policies and mandates for collaboration.

Xpey' Relational Environments: an analytic framework for conceptualizing Indigenous health equity. / Milieux relationnels Xpey' : un cadre analytique pour conceptualiser l'équité en santé autochtone.

INTRODUCTION: Both health equity research and Indigenous health research are driven by the goal of promoting equitable health outcomes among marginalized and underserved populations. However, the two fields often operate independently, without collaboration. As a result, Indigenous populations are underrepresented in health equity research relative to the disproportionate burden of health inequities they experience. In this methodological article, we present Xpey' Relational Environments, an analytic framework that maps some of the barriers and facilitators to health equity for Indigenous peoples. METHODS: Health equity research needs to include a focus on Indigenous populations and Indigenized methodologies, a shift that could fill gaps in knowledge with the potential to contribute to 'closing the gap' in Indigenous health. With this in mind, the Equity Lens in Public Health (ELPH) research program adopted the Xpey' Relational Environments framework to add a focus on Indigenous populations to our research on the prioritization and implementation of health equity. The analytic framework introduced an Indigenized health equity lens to our methodology, which facilitated the identification of social, structural and systemic determinants of Indigenous health. To test the framework, we conducted a pilot case study of one of British Columbia's regional health authorities, which included a review of core policies and plans as well as interviews and focus groups with frontline staff, managers and senior executives. CONCLUSION: ELPH's application of Xpey' Relational Environments serves as an example of the analytic framework's utility for exploring and conceptualizing Indigenous health equity in BC's public health system. Future applications of the framework should be embedded in Indigenous research methodologies.

INTRODUCTION: Si la recherche sur l'équité en santé et la recherche sur la santé autochtone ont toutes deux pour objectif de promouvoir des résultats équitables en santé parmi les populations marginalisées et à moindre accès aux soins, elles fonctionnent souvent de manière indépendante et sans collaboration, conduisant à une sous-représentation des populations autochtones dans la recherche sur l'équité en santé relativement au fardeau disproportionné des inégalités subies. Dans cet article méthodologique, nous présentons Milieux relationnels Xpey', un cadre analytique qui décrit certains obstacles et éléments facilitateurs en matière d'équité en santé pour les peuples autochtones. MÉTHODOLOGIE: La recherche sur l'équité en santé doit se concentrer sur les populations autochtones et les méthodologies autochtonisées, changement qui pourrait combler les lacunes dans les connaissances et contribuer à combler le fossé observé en santé autochtone. Dans ce cadre, le programme de recherche Optique d'équité en santé publique (Equity Lens in Public Health, ELPH) a adopté le cadre analytique Milieux relationnels Xpey' pour que la recherche sur la priorisation et la mise en oeuvre de l'équité en santé soit davantage centrée sur les populations autochtones. Le cadre analytique a ajouté à notre méthodologie une optique autochtonisée d'équité en santé qui a facilité la reconnaissance des déterminants sociaux, structurels et systémiques de la santé autochtone. Pour éprouver ce cadre analytique, nous avons mené une étude de cas pilote portant sur l'une des autorités sanitaires régionales de la Colombie-Britannique, consistant en un examen des politiques et des plans de référence et intégrant des entrevues et des groupes de travail avec du personnel de première ligne, des gestionnaires et des hauts dirigeants. CONCLUSION: L'application à ELPH de Milieux relationnels Xpey' illustre l'utilité de ce cadre analytique pour explorer et conceptualiser l'équité en santé autochtone dans le système de santé publique de la Colombie-Britannique. Des applications du cadre analytique devront être intégrées aux méthodes de recherche sur les Autochtones.

"Layers of translation" - evidence literacy in public health practice: a qualitative secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening public health systems has been a concern in Canada in the wake of public health emergencies. In one Canadian province, British Columbia, a high priority has been placed on the role of evidence to guide decision making; however, there are numerous challenges to using evidence in practice. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools therefore developed the Evidence Informed Public Health Framework (EIPH), a seven step guide to assist public health practitioners to use evidence in practice. We used this framework to examine the evidence literacy of public health practitioners in BC. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of two separate qualitative studies on the public health renewal process in which the use and understanding of evidence were key interview questions. Using constant comparative analysis, we analyzed the evidence-related data, mapping it to the categories of the EIPH framework. RESULTS: Participants require both data and evidence for multiple purposes in their daily work; data may be more important to them than research evidence. They are keen to provide evidence-based programs in which research evidence is balanced with community knowledge and local data. Practitioners recognise appraisal as an important step in using evidence, but the type of evidence most often used in daily practice does not easily lend itself to established methods for appraising research evidence. In the synthesis stage of the EIPH process, synthesized evidence in the form of systematic reviews and practice guidelines is emphasized. Participants, however, need to synthesize across the multiple forms of evidence they use and see the need for more skill and resources to help them develop skill in this type of synthesis. CONCLUSIONS: Public health practitioners demonstrated a good level of evidence literacy, particularly at the collective level in the organization. The EIPH framework provides helpful guidance in how to use research evidence in practice, but it lacks support on appraising and synthesizing across the various types of evidence that practitioners consider essential in their practice. We can better support practitioners by appreciating the range of evidence they use and value and by creating tools that help them to do this.

Prevalence and correlates of electronic cigarette use among Canadian students: cross-sectional findings from the 2014/15 Canadian Student Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, youth tobacco use has declined, and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have entered the market. The aims of this study were to describe the prevalence of e-cigarette use among youth in Canada, by province, across sociodemographic variables and smoking-related correlates; and to examine associations among e-cigarette use, sociodemographic variables and smoking-related correlates, with adjustment for other factors. METHODS: The 2014/15 Canadian Student Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey, a biennial, school-based survey, was administered to students in grades 6-12 in all Canadian provinces. Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate odds of ever and past 30-day e-cigarette use by sociodemographic variables and smoking-related correlates. RESULTS: A total of 336 schools from 128 school boards (47% of eligible schools approached) and 42 094 students (66% of eligible students approached) participated in the survey. In Canada, 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.4%-18.9%) of students in grades 6-12 reported ever using e-cigarettes, and 5.7% (95% CI 5.2%-6.3%) reported past 30-day use. Substantial variation was observed across provinces. Female students had decreased odds of past 30-day use relative to male students (odds ratio [OR] 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86), whereas current smokers (OR 10.0, 95% CI 6.66-15.02) and experimental smokers (OR 3.61, 95% CI 2.40-5.42) had increased odds relative to never smokers. Students who perceived that access was easy also had increased odds of using e-cigarettes relative to students who perceived that access was difficult (OR 3.86, 95% CI 2.96-5.03). Students who believed that regular use entailed slight risk (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.88) and those who did not know risk levels (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.21-0.46) had decreased odds compared with those perceiving no risk. INTERPRETATION: Our data confirm that many youth used e-cigarettes in the 30 days preceding the survey, although rates were substantially higher among current and experimental smokers than among students who had never tried smoking.

Claims in vapour device (e-cigarette) regulation: A Narrative Policy Framework analysis.

BACKGROUND: The electronic cigarette or e-cigarette (vapour device) is a consumer product undergoing rapid growth, and governments have been adopting regulations on the sale of the devices and their nicotine liquids. Competing claims about vapour devices have ignited a contentious debate in the public health community. What claims have been taken up in the state arena, and how have they possibly influenced regulatory outcomes? METHODS: This study utilized Narrative Policy Framework to analyze the claims made about vapour devices in legislation recommendation reports from Queensland Australia, Canada, and the European Union, and the 2016 deeming rule legislation from the United States, and examined the claims and the regulatory outcomes in these jurisdictions. RESULTS: The vast majority of claims in the policy documents represented vapour devices as a threat: an unsafe product harming the health of vapour device users, a gateway product promoting youth tobacco uptake, and a quasi-tobacco product impeding tobacco control. The opportunity for vapour devices to promote cessation or reduce exposure to toxins was very rarely presented, and these positive claims were not discussed at all in two of the four documents studied. CONCLUSION: The dominant claims of vapour devices as a public health threat have supported regulations that have limited their potential as a harm reduction strategy. Future policy debates should evaluate the opportunities for vapour devices to decrease the health and social burdens of the tobacco epidemic.

Health Equity Talk: Understandings of Health Equity among Health Leaders.

INTRODUCTION: Reducing health inequities is a stated goal of health systems worldwide. There is widespread commitment to health equity among public health leaders and calls for reorientation of health systems towards health equity. As part of the Equity Lens in Public Health (ELPH) program of research, public health decision makers and researchers in British Columbia collaborated to study the application of a health equity lens in a time of health system renewal. We drew on intersectionality, complexity and critical social justice theories to understand how participants construct health equity and apply a health equity lens as part of public health renewal. METHODS: 15 focus groups and 16 individual semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 55 health system leaders. Data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis to explore how health equity was constructed in relation to understandings and actions. RESULTS: Four main themes were identified in terms of how health care leaders construct health equity and actions to reduce health inequities: (1) population health, (2) determinants of health, and (3) accessibility and (4) challenges of health equity talk. The first three aspects of health equity talk reflect different understandings of health equity rooted in vulnerability (individual versus structural), determinants of health (material versus social determinants), and appropriate health system responses (targeted versus universal responses). Participants identified that talking about health equity in the health care system, either inside or outside of public health, is a 'challenging conversation' because health equity is understood in diverse ways and there is little guidance available to apply a health equity lens. CONCLUSIONS: These findings reflect the importance of creating a shared understanding of health equity within public health systems, and providing guidance and clarity as to the meaning and application of a health equity lens. A health equity lens for public health should capture both the production and distribution of health inequities and link to social justice to inform action.

Clearing the air: protocol for a systematic meta-narrative review on the harms and benefits of e-cigarettes and vapour devices.

BACKGROUND: Under the shadow of the tobacco epidemic, the sale and use of e-cigarettes and other vapour devices is increasing dramatically. A contentious debate has risen within public health over the harms and benefits of these devices. Clearing the Air seeks to clarify the issues with a systematic review that informs the pressing regulatory and public health decisions to be made regarding these new products. METHODS/DESIGN: Using an integrated knowledge translation approach, public health researchers and knowledge users will work collaboratively throughout the project. Our research questions are the following: (1) What are the health risks and benefits of vapour devices, and how do these compare to cigarettes? (2) What is the harm reduction potential of vapour devices for individuals, the environment, and society? (3) Does youth vapour device experimentation lead to cigarette use? (4) Can vapour devices be effective aids for tobacco cessation? and (5) What is the potential toxicity of second-hand vapour? We are using meta-narrative review to synthesize studies from diverse research traditions because of its capacity to address contestations around a topic. The project has six phases. In the planning phase, we finalized the research questions. In the search phase, we are locating academic publications and grey literature aided by a research librarian. The mapping phase involves categorizing these papers into research traditions to understand different perspectives on the evidence for each research question. In the appraisal phase, we will select and evaluate the relevant papers. Finally, in the synthesis phase, using analytic techniques unique to meta-narrative methodology, we will compare and contrast the evidence from different research traditions to answer our research questions, identifying overarching meta-narratives. In the final stage, the full team will draft recommendations to be disseminated through a variety of knowledge translation strategies. DISCUSSION: Meta-narrative synthesis has the unique capacity to expose the debates that are influencing the interpretation of empirical studies on vapour devices. We seek to "clear the air" with an even-handed review of the evidence and an understanding of the tensions within public health so that we can offer clear-headed recommendations for policy, regulation, and future research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015025267.

Moving towards a new vision: implementation of a public health policy intervention.

BACKGROUND: Public health systems in Canada have undergone significant policy renewal over the last decade in response to threats to the public's health, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome. There is limited research on how public health policies have been implemented or what has influenced their implementation. This paper explores policy implementation in two exemplar public health programs -chronic disease prevention and sexually-transmitted infection prevention - in Ontario, Canada. It examines public health service providers', managers' and senior managements' perspectives on the process of implementation of the Ontario Public Health Standards 2008 and factors influencing implementation. METHODS: Public health staff from six health units representing rural, remote, large and small urban settings were included. We conducted 21 focus groups and 18 interviews between 2010 (manager and staff focus groups) and 2011 (senior management interviews) involving 133 participants. Research assistants coded transcripts and researchers reviewed these; the research team discussed and resolved discrepancies. To facilitate a breadth of perspectives, several team members helped interpret the findings. An integrated knowledge translation approach was used, reflected by the inclusion of academics as well as decision-makers on the team and as co-authors. RESULTS: Front line service providers often were unaware of the new policies but managers and senior management incorporated them in operational and program planning. Some participants were involved in policy development or provided feedback prior to their launch. Implementation was influenced by many factors that aligned with Greenhalgh and colleagues' empirically-based Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations Framework. Factors and related components that were most clearly linked to the OPHS policy implementation were: attributes of the innovation itself; adoption by individuals; diffusion and dissemination; the outer context - interorganizational networks and collaboration; the inner setting - implementation processes and routinization; and, linkage at the design and implementation stage. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors influenced public health policy implementation. Results provide empirical support for components of Greenhalgh et al's framework and suggest two additional components - the role of external organizational collaborations and partnerships as well as planning processes in influencing implementation. These are important to consider by government and public health organizations when promoting new or revised public health policies as they evolve over time. A successful policy implementation process in Ontario has helped to move public health towards the new vision.