'Snapshot in time': a cross-sectional study exploring stakeholder experiences with environmental scans in health services delivery research.

OBJECTIVE: To describe stakeholder characteristics and perspectives about experiences, challenges and information needs related to the use of environmental scans (ESs). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A web-based survey platform was used to disseminate an online survey to stakeholders who had experience with conducting ESs in a health services delivery context (eg, researchers, policy makers, practitioners). Participants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling. The survey was disseminated internationally, was available in English and French, and remained open for 6 weeks (15 October to 30 November 2022). ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics were used to describe the characteristics and experiences of stakeholders. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the open-text questions. RESULTS: Of 47 participants who responded to the survey, 94% were from Canada, 4% from the USA and 2% from Australia. Respondents represented academic institutions (57%), health agency/government (32%) and non-government organisations or agencies (11%). Three themes were identified: (a) having a sense of value and utility; (b) experiencing uncertainty and confusion; and (c) seeking guidance. The data suggest stakeholders found value and utility in ESs and conducted them for varied purposes including to: (a) enhance knowledge, understanding and learning about the current landscape or state of various features of health services delivery (eg, programmes, practices, policies, services, best practices); (b) expose needs, service barriers, challenges, gaps, threats, opportunities; (c) help guide action for planning, policy and programme development; and (d) inform recommendations and decision-making. Stakeholders also experienced conceptual, methodological and practical barriers when conducting ESs, and expressed a need for methodological guidance delivered through published guidelines, checklists and other means. CONCLUSION: ESs have value and utility for addressing health services delivery concerns, but conceptual and methodological challenges exist. Further research is needed to help advance the ES as a distinct design that provides a systematic approach to planning and conducting ESs.

A scoping review reveals candidate quality indicators of knowledge translation and implementation science practice tools.

OBJECTIVES: To identify candidate quality indicators from existing tools that provide guidance on how to practice knowledge translation and implemenation science (KT practice tools) across KT domains (dissemination, implementation, sustainability, and scalability). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. We systematically searched multiple electronic databases and the gray literature. Documents were independently screened, selected, and extracted by pairs of reviewers. Data about the included articles, KT practice tools, and candidate quality indicators were analyzed, categorized, and summarized descriptively. RESULTS: Of 43,060 titles and abstracts that were screened from electronic databases and gray literature, 850 potentially relevant full-text articles were identified, and 253 articles were included in the scoping review. Of these, we identified 232 unique KT practice tools from which 27 unique candidate quality indicators were generated. The identified candidate quality indicators were categorized according to the development (n = 17), evaluation (n = 5) and adaptation (n = 3) of the tools, and engagement of knowledge users (n = 2). No tools were identified that appraised the quality of KT practice tools. CONCLUSIONS: The development of a quality appraisal instrument of KT practice tools is needed. The results will be further refined and finalized in order to develop a quality appraisal instrument for KT practice tools.

Using implementation science to promote the use of the fascia iliaca blocks in hip fracture care.

PURPOSE: There is variable and suboptimal use of fascia iliaca compartment nerve blocks (FICBs) in hip fracture care. Our objective was to use an evidence-based and theory-informed implementation science approach to analyze barriers and facilitators to timely administration of FICB and select evidence-based interventions to enhance uptake. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study at a single centre using semistructured interviews and site observations. We interviewed 35 stakeholders including health care providers, managers, patients, and caregivers. We mapped barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We compared the rate and timeliness of FICB administration before and after evidence-based implementation strategies were applied. RESULTS: The study identified 18 barriers and 11 facilitators within seven themes of influences of FICB use: interpersonal relationships between health care professionals; clinician knowledge and skills related to FICB; roles, responsibilities, and processes for delivering FICB; perceptions on using FICB for pain; patient and caregiver perceptions on using FICB for pain; communication of hip fracture care between departments; and resources for delivering FICBs. We mapped the behaviour change domains to eight implementation strategies: restructure the environment, create and distribute educational materials, prepare patients to be active participants, perform audits and give feedback, use local opinion leaders, use champions, train staff on FICB procedures, and mandate change. We observed an increase in the rates of FICBs administered (48% vs 65%) and a decrease in the median time to administration (1.63 vs 0.81 days). CONCLUSION: Our study explains why FICBs are underused and shows that the TDF and CFIR provide a framework to identify barriers and facilitators to FICB implementation. The mapped implementation strategies can guide institutions to improve use of FICB in hip fracture care.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Il existe une utilisation variable et sous-optimale des blocs nerveux du compartiment fascia iliaca (FICB) dans les soins des fractures de la hanche. Notre objectif était d'utiliser une approche scientifique de la mise en œuvre fondée sur des données probantes et sur la théorie pour analyser les obstacles et les facilitateurs à l'administration opportune d'un FICB et pour sélectionner des interventions fondées sur des données probantes pour améliorer l'adoption de cette technique. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude qualitative dans un seul centre à l'aide d'entrevues semi-structurées et d'observations sur place. Nous avons interviewé 35 intervenant·es, y compris des prestataires de soins de santé, des gestionnaires, des patient·es et des soignant·es. Nous avons cartographié les obstacles et les facilitateurs du cadre des domaines théoriques (Theoretical Domains Framework, TDF) et du cadre consolidé pour la recherche sur la mise en œuvre (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, CFIR). Nous avons comparé le taux et la rapidité d'administration d'un FICB avant et après l'application des stratégies de mise en œuvre fondées sur des données probantes. RéSULTATS: L'étude a identifié 18 obstacles et 11 facilitateurs dans sept thèmes d'influence de l'utilisation du FICB : les relations interpersonnelles entre les professionnel·les de la santé; les connaissances et les compétences des clinicien·nes liées au FICB; les rôles, responsabilités et processus d'exécution des FICB; les perceptions de l'utilisation des FICB pour soulager la douleur; les perceptions des patient·es et des soignant·es concernant l'utilisation de FICB pour soulager la douleur; la communication des soins des fractures de la hanche entre les services; et les ressources nécessaires à l'exécution des FICB. Nous avons mis en correspondance les domaines de changement de comportement avec huit stratégies de mise en œuvre : restructurer l'environnement, créer et distribuer du matériel éducatif, préparer les patient·es à participer activement, effectuer des audits et donner de la rétroaction, faire appel à des leaders d'opinion locales et locaux, utiliser des champion·nes, former le personnel sur les interventions de FICB et forcer au changement. Nous avons observé une augmentation des taux de FICB administrés (48% vs 65%) et une diminution du délai médian d'administration (1,63 vs 0,81 jour). CONCLUSION: Notre étude explique pourquoi les FICB sont sous-utilisés et montre que le TDF et le CFIR fournissent un cadre pour identifier les obstacles et les facilitateurs à la mise en œuvre des FICB. Les stratégies de mise en œuvre cartographiées peuvent aider les établissements à améliorer l'utilisation des FICB dans le traitement des fractures de la hanche.

Developing the intersectionality supplemented Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and tools for intersectionality considerations.

BACKGROUND: The concept of intersectionality proposes that demographic and social constructs intersect with larger social structures of oppression and privilege to shape experiences. While intersectionality is a widely accepted concept in feminist and gender studies, there has been little attempt to use this lens in implementation science. We aimed to supplement the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a commonly used framework in implementation science, to support the incorporation of intersectionality in implementation science projects by (1) integrating an intersectional lens to the CFIR; and (2) developing a tool for researchers to be used alongside the updated framework. METHODS: Using a nominal group technique, an interdisciplinary framework committee (n = 17) prioritized the CFIR as one of three implementation science models, theories, and frameworks to supplement with intersectionality considerations; the modification of the other two frameworks are described in other papers. The CFIR subgroup (n = 7) reviewed the five domains and 26 constructs in the CFIR and prioritized domains and constructs for supplementation with intersectional considerations. The subgroup then iteratively developed recommendations and prompts for incorporating an intersectional approach within the prioritized domains and constructs. We developed recommendations and prompts to help researchers consider how personal identities and power structures may affect the facilitators and inhibitors of behavior change and the implementation of subsequent interventions. RESULTS: We achieved consensus on how to apply an intersectional lens to CFIR after six rounds of meetings. The final intersectionality supplemented CFIR includes the five original domains, and 28 constructs; the outer systems and structures and the outer cultures constructs were added to the outer setting domain. Intersectionality prompts were added to 13 of the 28 constructs. CONCLUSION: Through an expert-consensus approach, we modified the CFIR to include intersectionality considerations and developed a tool with prompts to help implementation users apply an intersectional lens using the updated framework.

Creation of a theoretically rooted workbook to support implementers in the practice of knowledge translation.

BACKGROUND: Few training opportunities or resources for non-expert implementers focus on the "practice" as opposed to the "science" of knowledge translation (KT). As a guide for novice implementers, we present an open-access, fillable workbook combining KT theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) that are commonly used to support the implementation of evidence-based practices. We describe the process of creating and operationalizing our workbook. METHODS: Our team has supported more than 1000 KT projects and 300 teams globally to implement evidence-based interventions. Our stakeholders have consistently highlighted their need for guidance on how to operationalize various KT TMFs to support novice implementers in "practising" KT. In direct response to these requests, we created a pragmatic, fillable KT workbook. The workbook was designed by KT scientists and experts in the fields of adult education, graphic design, and usability and was piloted with novice implementers. It is rooted in an integrated KT approach and applies an intersectionality lens, which prompts implementers to consider user needs in the design of implementation efforts. RESULTS: The workbook is framed according to the knowledge-to-action model and operationalizes each stage of the model using appropriate theories or frameworks. This approach removes guesswork in selecting appropriate TMFs to support implementation efforts. Implementers are prompted to complete fillable worksheets that are informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, the Behaviour Change Wheel, the Effective Practice and Organization of Care framework, Proctor's operationalization framework, the Durlak and DuPre process indicators, and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. As they complete the worksheets, users are guided to apply theoretically rooted approaches in planning the implementation and evaluation of their evidence-based practice. CONCLUSIONS: This workbook aims to support non-expert implementers to use KT TMFs to select and operationalize implementation strategies to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practices. It provides an accessible option for novice implementers who wish to use KT methods to guide their work.

Dissemination and implementation of clinical practice guidelines: a longitudinal, mixed-methods evaluation of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care's knowledge translation efforts.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (task force) develops evidence-based preventive health care guidelines and knowledge translation (KT) tools to facilitate guideline dissemination and implementation. We aimed to determine practitioners' awareness of task force guidelines and KT tools and explore barriers and facilitators to their use. METHODS: The task force's KT team completed annual evaluations using surveys and interviews with primary care providers in Canada from 2014 to 2020, to assess practitioners' awareness and determinants of use of task force guidelines and tools. We transcribed interviews verbatim and double-coded them using a framework analysis approach. RESULTS: A total of 1284 primary care practitioners completed surveys and 183 participated in interviews. On average, 79.9% of participants were aware of the task force's 7 cancer screening guidelines, 36.2% were aware of the other 6 screening guidelines and 18.6% were aware of the 3 lifestyle or prevention guidelines. Participants identified 13 barriers and 7 facilitators to guideline and KT tool implementation; these were consistent over time. Participants identified strategies at the public and patient, provider and health systems levels to improve uptake of guidelines. INTERPRETATION: Canadian primary care practitioners were more aware of task force cancer screening guidelines than its other preventive health guidelines. Over the 6-year period, participants consistently reported barriers to guideline uptake, including misalignment with patient preferences and other provincial or specialty guideline organizations. Further evaluations will assess tailored strategies to address the barriers identified.

Preconditioning program reduces the incidence of prolonged hospital stay after lung cancer surgery: Results from the Move For Surgery randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer resection is associated with high rates of prolonged hospital stay. It is presumed that preconditioning with aerobic exercise can shorten the postoperative duration of hospital stay, but this has not yet been demonstrated in trials after lung cancer surgery. The aim of this study was to perform a RCT to determine whether Move For Surgery (MFS), a home-based and wearable technology-enhanced preconditioning program before lung cancer surgery, is associated with a lower incidence of prolonged hospital stay when compared to usual preoperative care. METHODS: Patients undergoing lung resection for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer were enrolled before surgery into this blinded, single-site RCT, and randomized to either the MFS or control group in a 1 : 1 ratio. Patients in the MFS group were given a wearable activity tracker, and education about deep breathing exercises, nutrition, sleep hygiene, and smoking cessation. Participants were motivated/encouraged to reach incrementally increasing fitness goals remotely. Patients in the control group received usual preoperative care. The primary outcome was the difference in proportion of patients with hospital stay lasting more than 5 days between the MFS and control groups. RESULTS: Of 117 patients screened, 102 (87.2 per cent) were eligible, enrolled, and randomized (51 per trial arm). The majority (95 of 102, 93.1 per cent) completed the trial. Mean(s.d.) age was 67.2(8.8) years and there were 55 women (58 per cent). Type of surgery and rates of thoracotomy were not different between arms. The proportion of patients with duration of hospital stay over 5 days was 3 of 45 (7 per cent) in the MFS arm compared to 12 of 50 (24 per cent) in the control arm (P = 0.021). CONCLUSION: MFS, a home-based and wearable technology-enhanced preconditioning program before lung cancer surgery, decreased the proportion of patients with a prolonged hospital stay. Registration number: NCT03689634 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

After lung cancer surgery, many patients are admitted to hospital for a prolonged amount of time. It is believed that exercises undertaken before surgery can shorten the stay in hospital, but this has not yet been studied. This study aimed to find out whether Move For Surgery (MFS), a home-based exercise (preconditioning) program using wearable technology before lung cancer surgery, can decrease the number of patients who are admitted to hospital for a prolonged amount of time. Patients with lung cancer were invited to enter this trial 3­4 weeks before surgery. They were randomly put into the MFS or control group. Patients in the MFS group were given a wearable activity tracker, and education about deep breathing exercises, nutrition, sleep hygiene, and quitting smoking. Participants were encouraged to reach increasing fitness goals each week. Patients in the control group underwent usual preoperative care. The difference between the MFS and control groups in the proportion of patients with duration of stay in hospital exceeding 5 days was studied. There were 102 participants in total, 51 in each group. The majority (95 of 102, 93.1 per cent) completed the trial. The average age of participants was 67 years, and 58 per cent were women. Type of surgery and number of open operations were no different between groups. The proportion of patients with duration of stay greater than 5 days was 3 of 45 (7 per cent) in the MFS group compared with 12 of 50 (24 per cent) in the control group. Therefore, MFS before lung cancer surgery was shown to decrease the number of patients admitted to hospital for a prolonged amount of time.

Efficacy of sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions in chronic disease management in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions.

BACKGROUND: Chronic disease management (CDM) through sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions ensures long-term, high-quality care. We assessed implementation of KT interventions for supporting CDM and their efficacy when sustained in older adults. METHODS: Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis engaging 17 knowledge users using integrated KT. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adults (> 65 years old) with chronic disease(s), their caregivers, health and/or policy-decision makers receiving a KT intervention to carry out a CDM intervention for at least 12 months (versus other KT interventions or usual care). INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from each database's inception to March 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sustainability, fidelity, adherence of KT interventions for CDM practice, quality of life (QOL) and quality of care (QOC). Data extraction, risk of bias (ROB) assessment: We screened, abstracted and appraised articles (Effective Practice and Organisation of Care ROB tool) independently and in duplicate. DATA SYNTHESIS: We performed both random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses and estimated mean differences (MDs) for continuous and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data. RESULTS: We included 158 RCTs (973,074 participants [961,745 patients, 5540 caregivers, 5789 providers]) and 39 companion reports comprising 329 KT interventions, involving patients (43.2%), healthcare providers (20.7%) or both (10.9%). We identified 16 studies described as assessing sustainability in 8.1% interventions, 67 studies as assessing adherence in 35.6% interventions and 20 studies as assessing fidelity in 8.7% of the interventions. Most meta-analyses suggested that KT interventions improved QOL, but imprecisely (36 item Short-Form mental [SF-36 mental]: MD 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] [- 1.25, 3.47], 14 RCTs, 5876 participants, I2 = 96%; European QOL-5 dimensions: MD 0.01, 95% CI [- 0.01, 0.02], 15 RCTs, 6628 participants, I2 = 25%; St George's Respiratory Questionnaire: MD - 2.12, 95% CI [- 3.72, - 0.51] 44 12 RCTs, 2893 participants, I2 = 44%). KT interventions improved QOC (OR 1.55, 95% CI [1.29, 1.85], 12 RCTS, 5271 participants, I2 = 21%). CONCLUSIONS: KT intervention sustainability was infrequently defined and assessed. Sustained KT interventions have the potential to improve QOL and QOC in older adults with CDM. However, their overall efficacy remains uncertain and it varies by effect modifiers, including intervention type, chronic disease number, comorbidities, and participant age. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018084810.

Ontarians' Perceptions of Public Health Communications and Misinformation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Clear, accurate, and transparent risk communication is critical to providing policy makers and the public with directions to effectively implement public health strategies during a health emergency. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the public's preferred sources of obtaining COVID-19 information, perceptions on the prevalence and drivers of misinformation during the pandemic, and suggestions to optimize health communications during future public health emergencies. METHODS: We administered a web-based survey that included Likert scale, multiple choice and open-ended response questions to residents of Ontario, Canada. We aimed to recruit a sample that reflected population diversity with respect to age and gender. Data were collected between June 10, 2020, and December 31, 2020, and were analyzed using descriptive statistics; open-ended data were analyzed using content analysis. Subgroup analyses to explore perceptions by age and gender were conducted using ordinal regression. RESULTS: A total of 1823 individuals participated in the survey (n=990, 54% women; n=703, 39% men; n=982, 54% aged 18-40 years; n=518, 28% aged 41-60 years; and n=215, 12% aged ≥61 years). Participants most commonly obtained COVID-19 information from local television news (n=1118, 61%) followed by social media (n=938, 51%), national or international television news (n=888, 49%), and friends and family (n=835, 46%). Approximately 55% (n=1010) of the participants believed they had encountered COVID-19-related misinformation; 70% (n=1284) of the participants reported high levels of trust in health authority websites and health care providers; 66% (n=1211) reported high levels of trust in health ministers or public health organizations. Sources perceived to be less trustworthy included friends and family, talk radio, social media, as well as blogs and opinion websites. Men were more likely to report encountering misinformation and to trust friends or family (odds ratio [OR] 1.49, 95% CI 1.24-1.79) and blogs or opinion websites (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.50), compared to women. Compared to those aged 18-40 years, participants aged ≥41years were more likely to trust all assessed information sources, with the exception of web-based media sources, and less likely to report encountering misinformation. Of those surveyed, 58% (n=1053) had challenges identifying or appraising COVID-19 information. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of our participants perceived that they had encountered COVID-19 misinformation, and 58% had challenges identifying or appraising COVID-19 information. Gender and age differences in perceptions of misinformation and trust in information sources were observed. Future research to confirm the validity of these perceptions and to explore information-seeking patterns by population subgroups may provide useful insights on how to optimize health communication during public health emergencies.

Canadian public perceptions and experiences with information during the COVID-19 pandemic: strategies to optimize future risk communications.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the spread of misinformation worldwide. The purpose of this study was to explore perceptions of misinformation and preferred sources of obtaining COVID-19 information from those living in Canada. In particular, we sought to explore the perceptions of East Asian individuals in Canada, who experienced stigma related to COVID-19 messaging. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative thematic analysis study. Interviews were offered in English, Mandarin and Cantonese. Interviewers probed for domains related to knowledge about COVID-19, preferred sources of information, perceived barriers and facilitators of misinformation, and preferences for communication during a health emergency. Interviews were recorded, translated, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a framework approach. Transcripts were independently double-coded until > 60% agreement was reached. This study received research ethics approval. RESULTS: Fifty-five interviews were conducted. The majority of participants were women (67%); median age was 52 years. 55% of participants were of East-Asian descent. Participants obtained information about COVID-19 from diverse English and non-English sources including news media, government agencies or representatives, social media, and personal networks. Challenges to seeking and understanding information included: encountering misinformation, making sense of evolving or conflicting public health guidance, and limited information on topics of interest. 65% of participants reported encountering COVID-19  misinformation. East Asian participants called on government officials to champion messaging to reduce stigmatizing and racist rhetoric and highlighted the importance of having accessible, non-English language information sources. Participants provided recommendations for future public health communications guidance during health emergencies, including preferences for message content, information messengers, dissemination platforms and format of messages. Almost all participants preferred receiving information from the Canadian government and found it helpful to utilize various mediums and platforms such as social media and news media for future risk communication, urging for consistency across all platforms. CONCLUSIONS: We provide insights on Canadian experiences navigating COVID-19 information, where more than half perceived encountering misinformation on platforms when seeking COVID-19 information . We provide recommendations to inform public health communications during future health emergencies.

Comparison of mental health symptoms before and during the covid-19 pandemic: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 134 cohorts.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise results of mental health outcomes in cohorts before and during the covid-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, medRxiv, and Open Science Framework Preprints. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies comparing general mental health, anxiety symptoms, or depression symptoms assessed from 1 January 2020 or later with outcomes collected from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019 in any population, and comprising ≥90% of the same participants before and during the covid-19 pandemic or using statistical methods to account for missing data. Restricted maximum likelihood random effects meta-analyses (worse covid-19 outcomes representing positive change) were performed. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Prevalence Studies. RESULTS: As of 11 April 2022, 94 411 unique titles and abstracts including 137 unique studies from 134 cohorts were reviewed. Most of the studies were from high income (n=105, 77%) or upper middle income (n=28, 20%) countries. Among general population studies, no changes were found for general mental health (standardised mean difference (SMD)change 0.11, 95% confidence interval -0.00 to 0.22) or anxiety symptoms (0.05, -0.04 to 0.13), but depression symptoms worsened minimally (0.12, 0.01 to 0.24). Among women or female participants, general mental health (0.22, 0.08 to 0.35), anxiety symptoms (0.20, 0.12 to 0.29), and depression symptoms (0.22, 0.05 to 0.40) worsened by minimal to small amounts. In 27 other analyses across outcome domains among subgroups other than women or female participants, five analyses suggested that symptoms worsened by minimal or small amounts, and two suggested minimal or small improvements. No other subgroup experienced changes across all outcome domains. In three studies with data from March to April 2020 and late 2020, symptoms were unchanged from pre-covid-19 levels at both assessments or increased initially then returned to pre-covid-19 levels. Substantial heterogeneity and risk of bias were present across analyses. CONCLUSIONS: High risk of bias in many studies and substantial heterogeneity suggest caution in interpreting results. Nonetheless, most symptom change estimates for general mental health, anxiety symptoms, and depression symptoms were close to zero and not statistically significant, and significant changes were of minimal to small magnitudes. Small negative changes occurred for women or female participants in all domains. The authors will update the results of this systematic review as more evidence accrues, with study results posted online (https://www.depressd.ca/covid-19-mental-health). REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020179703.

Exploring Canadian perceptions and experiences of stigma during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to stigmatization of individuals based on race/ethnicity, age, gender, and occupation, among other factors. We canvassed Canadian residents to explore perceptions of and experiences with stigma during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted an online survey between June 10 and December 31 2020. The survey was rooted in the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework and included multiple choice, Likert and open-ended questions related to perceived and experienced stigma. Residents of Ontario, Canada were eligible to participate and we aimed to recruit a sample that was diverse by race/ethnicity and age. Results: A total of 1,823 individuals participated in the survey (54% women, 39% men; 54% 18-40 years old, 28% 41-60 years old, 12% 61+ years old; 33% White, 26% East/SouthEast Asian, 14% Black, 12% South Asian). Fifty-one percent of participants agreed/strongly agreed that racist views had increased toward certain racial/ethnic groups in Canada during the pandemic. Participants perceived that people in Canada were stigmatized during the pandemic because of race/ethnicity (37%), political beliefs (26%), older age (24%), being a healthcare worker (23%), younger age (22%), being an essential worker (21%), and gender (11%). Thirty-nine percent of respondents feared experiencing and 37% experienced stigmatization during the pandemic. Men, individuals aged 18-40, and racialized participants were more likely to fear or experience stigma. With respect to health behaviors, 74, 68, and 59% of respondents were comfortable masking in public, seeking medical care if they became ill, and getting tested for COVID-19, respectively. Men were less likely to indicate comfort with mask wearing or seeking medical care. Participants aged 18-40 and Black participants were less likely to indicate comfort with all three behaviors compared to those over age 41 and White participants, respectively. South Asian participants were less likely to be comfortable seeking medical care compared to White Participants. Discussion: Participants feared or experienced stigmatization towards various demographic characteristics during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is critical that the factors driving stigma during health emergencies in Canada be better understood in order to develop effective public health messaging and interventions.

A qualitative study on health stigma and discrimination in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learnt from a public health perspective.

Background: Stigmatisation, misinformation and discrimination have been magnified globally due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The healthcare sector was not spared from this. We conducted a transnational study, using the Health Stigma and Discrimination framework (HSDF) to explore public perception and reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic in a multicultural context. Findings from the Asian arm of the study, sited in Singapore, are reported in this paper. Methods: This phenomenological research deployed semi-structured informant interviews using non-probability sampling approaches to recruit members of the public. Interviews were coded independently by two researchers and thematic analysis was used to analyse the responses. Results: Twenty-nine members of the public (23-80 years old) were interviewed between Oct 2020 to Feb 2021. Five major themes were identified: (i) perception of stigma amongst respondents, (ii) experiences of stigma amongst respondents, (iii) views on what drove stigma and misinformation, (iv) facilitators in preventing and reducing stigma and misinformation, and (v) ageist attitudes towards older adults. Overall, construction workers living in dormitories, healthcare workers, and to some extent tourists from China, were perceived to have been stigmatised and shunned by the public. Place-based stigmatisation was common; participants responded by avoiding places that had confirmed cases of COVID-19. Perceived stigma was temporary and not enduring, driven at the outset by fear of being infected. This study also identified the role played by trust in reducing stigmatisation. The relative absence of politicising of issues and high-quality information readily disseminated to the public were reported as factors that could have reduced and prevented stigma and misinformation on the various groups. Ageist attitudes were observed in some participants with older adults being labelled as vulnerable, susceptible to misinformation and being less able to cope during the pandemic. Conclusion: Through the lens of the HSDF, this study provided an exploratory account of the nature of stigma that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic in an Asian context. It also shed light on facilitators in preventing and reducing stigma during an outbreak especially the role of trust and communications during a public health crisis.

Which Curve Are We Flattening? The Disproportionate Impact of COVID-19 Among Economically Marginalized Communities in Ontario, Canada, Was Unchanged From Wild-Type to Omicron.

Person-level surveillance (N = 14 million) and neighborhood-level income data were used to explore magnitude of inequalities in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths over 5 waves in Ontario, Canada. Despite attempts at equity-informed policies alongside fluctuating levels of public health measures, the magnitude of inequalities in hospitalizations and deaths remained unchanged across waves.

Trial of an Intervention to Improve Acute Heart Failure Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute heart failure are frequently or systematically hospitalized, often because the risk of adverse events is uncertain and the options for rapid follow-up are inadequate. Whether the use of a strategy to support clinicians in making decisions about discharging or admitting patients, coupled with rapid follow-up in an outpatient clinic, would affect outcomes remains uncertain. METHODS: In a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial conducted in Ontario, Canada, we randomly assigned 10 hospitals to staggered start dates for one-way crossover from the control phase (usual care) to the intervention phase, which involved the use of a point-of-care algorithm to stratify patients with acute heart failure according to the risk of death. During the intervention phase, low-risk patients were discharged early (in ≤3 days) and received standardized outpatient care, and high-risk patients were admitted to the hospital. The coprimary outcomes were a composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes within 30 days after presentation and the composite outcome within 20 months. RESULTS: A total of 5452 patients were enrolled in the trial (2972 during the control phase and 2480 during the intervention phase). Within 30 days, death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 301 patients (12.1%) who were enrolled during the intervention phase and in 430 patients (14.5%) who were enrolled during the control phase (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 0.99; P = 0.04). Within 20 months, the cumulative incidence of primary-outcome events was 54.4% (95% CI, 48.6 to 59.9) among patients who were enrolled during the intervention phase and 56.2% (95% CI, 54.2 to 58.1) among patients who were enrolled during the control phase (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.99). Fewer than six deaths or hospitalizations for any cause occurred in low- or intermediate-risk patients before the first outpatient visit within 30 days after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute heart failure who were seeking emergency care, the use of a hospital-based strategy to support clinical decision making and rapid follow-up led to a lower risk of the composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes within 30 days than usual care. (Funded by the Ontario SPOR Support Unit and others; COACH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02674438.).

A Peer Data Benchmarking Intervention to Reduce Opioid Overprescribing: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Driving physician behavior change has been an elusive goal for quality improvement efforts aimed at reducing low-value care. We proposed the use of "nudge" interventions at the surgeon level in order to reduce post-surgical opioid overprescribing in accordance with consensus guidelines. METHODS: We used 2017 Medicare data to identify outlier surgeons. A peer data benchmarking report that showed each surgeon the average number of opioid tablets they prescribed for an open inguinal hernia repair procedure from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. We conducted a 1:1 randomized controlled trial providing outlier surgeons a report of their opioid prescribing patterns for a standard operation compared to the national average and prescribing guidelines. RESULTS: There were 489 surgeons randomized to the intervention, of which 180 (36.8%) had data in the post-intervention period. Data was available for 87 surgeons in the intervention group and 93 surgeons in the control group. 97.7% of surgeons in the intervention group reduced their opioid prescribing pattern compared to 95.7% in the control group. Surgeons who received the data benchmarking report intervention prescribed 14.3% less opioids than surgeons in the control group (10.54 (SD 5.34) vs. 12.30 (SD 6.02), P = .04). The intervention was associated with a 1.83 lower mean number of opioid tablets prescribed per patient in the multivariable linear regression model after controlling for other factors (Intervention group vs. control group 95% CI [-3.61, -.04], P = .04). DISCUSSION: The implementation of a peer data benchmarking intervention can drive physician behavior change towards high-value care.

Identifying candidate quality indicators of tools that support the practice of knowledge translation: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to identify and characterize relevant knowledge translation methods tools (those that provide guidance for optimized knowledge translation practice) to uncover candidate quality indicators to inform a future quality assessment tool for knowledge translation strategies. INTRODUCTION: Knowledge translation strategies (defined as including knowledge translation interventions, tools, and products) target various knowledge users, including patients, clinicians, researchers, and policy-makers. The development and use of strategies that support knowledge translation practice have been rapidly increasing, making it difficult for knowledge users to decide which to use. There is limited evidence-based guidance or measures to help assess the overall quality of knowledge translation strategies. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Empirical and non-empirical documents will be considered if they explicitly describe a knowledge translation methods tool and its development, evaluation or validation, methodological strengths or limitations, and/or use over time. The review will consider a knowledge translation methods tool if it falls within at least one knowledge translation domain (ie, implementation, dissemination, sustainability, scalability, integrated knowledge translation) in the health field. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic search of relevant electronic databases and gray literature. The search strategy will be developed iteratively by an experienced medical information specialist and peer-reviewed with the PRESS checklist. The search will be limited to English-only documents published from 2005 onward. Documents will be independently screened, selected, and extracted by 2 researchers. Data will be analyzed and summarized descriptively, including the characteristics of the included documents, knowledge translation methods tools, and candidate quality indicators. SCOPING REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/chxvq ).

An exploration of Canadian government officials' COVID-19 messages and the public's reaction using social media data.

Governments can use social media platforms such as Twitter to disseminate health information to the public, as evidenced during the COVID-19 pandemic [Pershad (2018)]. The purpose of this study is to gain a better understanding of Canadian government and public health officials' use of Twitter as a dissemination platform during the pandemic and to explore the public's engagement with and sentiment towards these messages. We examined the account data of 93 Canadian public health and government officials during the first wave of the pandemic in Canada (December 31, 2019 August 31, 2020). Our objectives were to: 1) determine the engagement rates of the public with Canadian federal and provincial/territorial governments and public health officials' Twitter posts; 2) conduct a hashtag trend analysis to explore the Canadian public's discourse related to the pandemic during this period; 3) provide insights on the public's reaction to Canadian authorities' tweets through sentiment analysis. To address these objectives, we extracted Twitter posts, replies, and associated metadata available during the study period in both English and French. Our results show that the public demonstrated increased engagement with federal officials' Twitter accounts as compared to provincial/territorial accounts. For the hashtag trends analysis of the public discourse during the first wave of the pandemic, we observed a topic shift in the Canadian public discourse over time between the period prior to the first wave and the first wave of the pandemic. Additionally, we identified 11 sentiments expressed by the public when reacting to Canadian authorities' tweets. This study illustrates the potential to leverage social media to understand public discourse during a pandemic. We suggest that routine analyses of such data by governments can provide governments and public health officials with real-time data on public sentiments during a public health emergency. These data can be used to better disseminate key messages to the public.

COVID-19 Cases Among Congregate Care Facility Staff by Neighborhood of Residence and Social and Structural Determinants: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Disproportionate risks of COVID-19 in congregate care facilities including long-term care homes, retirement homes, and shelters both affect and are affected by SARS-CoV-2 infections among facility staff. In cities across Canada, there has been a consistent trend of geographic clustering of COVID-19 cases. However, there is limited information on how COVID-19 among facility staff reflects urban neighborhood disparities, particularly when stratified by the social and structural determinants of community-level transmission. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the concentration of cumulative cases by geography and social and structural determinants across 3 mutually exclusive subgroups in the Greater Toronto Area (population: 7.1 million): community, facility staff, and health care workers (HCWs) in other settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational study using surveillance data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases (January 23 to December 13, 2020; prior to vaccination rollout). We derived neighborhood-level social and structural determinants from census data and generated Lorenz curves, Gini coefficients, and the Hoover index to visualize and quantify inequalities in cases. RESULTS: The hardest-hit neighborhoods (comprising 20% of the population) accounted for 53.87% (44,937/83,419) of community cases, 48.59% (2356/4849) of facility staff cases, and 42.34% (1669/3942) of other HCW cases. Compared with other HCWs, cases among facility staff reflected the distribution of community cases more closely. Cases among facility staff reflected greater social and structural inequalities (larger Gini coefficients) than those of other HCWs across all determinants. Facility staff cases were also more likely than community cases to be concentrated in lower-income neighborhoods (Gini 0.24, 95% CI 0.15-0.38 vs 0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.21) with a higher household density (Gini 0.23, 95% CI 0.17-0.29 vs 0.17, 95% CI 0.12-0.22) and with a greater proportion working in other essential services (Gini 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.40 vs 0.22, 95% CI 0.17-0.28). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 cases among facility staff largely reflect neighborhood-level heterogeneity and disparities, even more so than cases among other HCWs. The findings signal the importance of interventions prioritized and tailored to the home geographies of facility staff in addition to workplace measures, including prioritization and reach of vaccination at home (neighborhood level) and at work.

Systematic review of mental health symptom changes by sex or gender in early-COVID-19 compared to pre-pandemic.

Women and gender-diverse individuals have faced disproportionate socioeconomic burden during COVID-19. There have been reports of greater negative mental health changes compared to men based on cross-sectional research that has not accounted for pre-COVID-19 differences. We compared mental health changes from pre-COVID-19 to during COVID-19 by sex or gender. MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection: Citation Indexes, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, medRxiv (preprints), and Open Science Framework Preprints (preprint server aggregator) were searched to August 30, 2021. Eligible studies included mental health symptom change data by sex or gender. 12 studies (10 unique cohorts) were included, all of which reported dichotomized sex or gender data. 9 cohorts reported results from March to June 2020, and 2 of these also reported on September or November to December 2020. One cohort included data pre-November 2020 data but did not provide dates. Continuous symptom change differences were not statistically significant for depression (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.12, 95% CI -0.09-0.33; 4 studies, 4,475 participants; I2 = 69.0%) and stress (SMD = - 0.10, 95% CI -0.21-0.01; 4 studies, 1,533 participants; I2 = 0.0%), but anxiety (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI 0.07-0.22; 4 studies, 4,344 participants; I2 = 3.0%) and general mental health (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI 0.12-0.18; 3 studies, 15,692 participants; I2 = 0.0%) worsened more among females/women than males/men. There were no significant differences in changes in proportions above cut-offs: anxiety (difference = - 0.05, 95% CI - 0.20-0.11; 1 study, 217 participants), depression (difference = 0.12, 95% CI -0.03-0.28; 1 study, 217 participants), general mental health (difference = - 0.03, 95% CI - 0.09-0.04; 3 studies, 18,985 participants; I2 = 94.0%), stress (difference = 0.04, 95% CI - 0.10-0.17; 1 study, 217 participants). Mental health outcomes did not differ or were worse by small amounts among women than men during early COVID-19.