Access to cancer clinical trials for racialised older adults: an equity-focused rapid scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The intersection of race and older age compounds existing health disparities experienced by historically marginalised communities. Therefore, racialised older adults with cancer are more disadvantaged in their access to cancer clinical trials compared with age-matched counterparts. To determine what has already been published in this area, the rapid scoping review question are: what are the barriers, facilitators and potential solutions for enhancing access to cancer clinical trials among racialised older adults? METHODS: We will use a rapid scoping review methodology in which we follow the six-step framework of Arksey and O'Malley, including a systematic search of the literature with abstract and full-text screening to be conducted by two independent reviewers, data abstraction by one reviewer and verification by a second reviewer using an Excel data abstraction sheet. Articles focusing on persons aged 18 and over who identify as a racialised person with cancer, that describe therapies/therapeutic interventions/prevention/outcomes related to barriers, facilitators and solutions to enhancing access to and equity in cancer clinical trials will be eligible for inclusion in this rapid scoping review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All data will be extracted from published literature. Hence, ethical approval and patient informed consent are not required. The findings of the scoping review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at international conferences.

Clarifying contemporary conceptualizations of allyship with LGBTQ2S+ groups in the context of health care or health settings: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to better understand how allyship is defined in the literature from 1970 to the present with regard to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirit, and other (LGBTQ2S+) groups within health settings where English is the primary spoken language. INTRODUCTION: LGBTQ2S+ individuals experience health inequities rooted in discrimination. Activism to redress this discrimination in health settings is frequently termed allyship. Definitions of allyship, however, remain ambiguous. A clearer understanding of how allyship is defined and operationalized within health settings is integral to supporting the health of LGBTQ2S+ groups. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Literature in English from 1970 to the present that utilizes the concept of allyship within health care and/or health settings in relation to LGBTQ2S+ groups in Canada and the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom will be included. METHODS: This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Databases to be searched will include MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), LGBTQ+ Source (EBSCOhost), Scopus, and Web of Science, along with ProQuest Dissertations and Theses for gray literature. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full-text articles; discrepancies will be resolved by consensus or with a third reviewer. Data will be extracted using an extraction tool developed by the research team. Findings will be presented in tabular/diagram format along with a narrative summary to highlight key themes that relate to contemporary conceptualizations of allyship with LGBTQ2S+ individuals/groups within health care settings and the implications for health professional practice and health outcomes. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework osf.io/2rek9.

Cancer survivors 75 years and older: physical, emotional and practical needs.

OBJECTIVES: To describe physical, emotional and practical concerns and access to help of Canadian cancer survivors aged 75+ years following treatment. METHODS: A survey was designed to identify concerns and access to help across three supportive care domains for cancer survivors 1-3 years post-treatment. Random samples were drawn from 10 provincial cancer registries. Survey packages were mailed to 40 790 survivors with option to reply by mail or online in French or English. Descriptive analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 3274 (25%) survivors aged 75+ years responded to the survey. Fifty-five per cent were men, 72% had not experienced metastatic spread and 75% reported comorbid conditions. Eighty-one per cent reported experiencing at least one physical concern, 63% experienced at least one emotional concern and 30% experienced at least one practical concern. The most commonly reported concerns were for two physical changes (fatigue 62% and bladder/urinary problems 39%) and one emotional change (anxiety/fear of recurrence 53%). More than 50% did not receive assistance for 15 concerns across the three domains. The most frequently cited reason for not seeking help for a concern was that they were told it was normal and they did not think anything could be done. Unmet needs existed for all physical, emotional and practical changes ranging from 41% to 88% of respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Many older adults are at risk for experiencing physical, emotional and practical concerns following cancer treatment yet are not obtaining help. Action is needed for early identification of these individuals to mitigate the impact of unmet needs for older cancer survivors.