Patient-oriented research: An essential driver of learning health system capacity development.

Canada's health system faces a lag in implementing high-quality evidence and research-driven innovation into service delivery, while demonstrating accountability and benefit to the public. To address these challenges, Patient-Oriented Research (POR) builds teams that engage researchers, healthcare providers, decision-makers, and most importantly, patients (people with lived and living experience) in the process of generating and applying evidence to inform health services and decision-making. A Learning Health System (LHS) systematically integrates external evidence with internal data and experience and puts that knowledge into practice in a continuous cycle. Using a POR/LHS example from a BC health authority, we describe nine enablers required to support LHS capacity development. The LHS case study, Walk With Me, addresses a health system high-priority topic: the toxic drug crisis. Understanding the value of learning health systems, along with the enablers required to support and implement them, will empower health leaders to champion and orchestrate positive change.

Equity-oriented frameworks to inform responses to opioid overdoses: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review was to systematically identify and describe literature that uses a health equity-oriented approach for preventing and reducing the harms of stigma or overdose for people who use illicit drugs or misuse prescription opioids. INCLUSION CRITERIA: To be included, papers had to both: i) use a health equity-oriented approach, defined as a response that addresses health inequities and aims to reduce drug-related harms of stigma or overdose; and ii) include at least one of the following concepts: cultural safety, trauma- and violence-informed care, or harm reduction. We also looked for papers that included an Indigenous-informed perspective in addition to any of the three concepts. METHODS: An a priori protocol was published and the JBI methodology for conducting scoping reviews was employed. Published and unpublished literature from January 1, 2000, to July 31, 2019, was included. The databases searched included CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Sociological Abstracts and Social Services Abstracts (ProQuest), JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO, Aboriginal Health Abstract Database, First Nations Periodical Index, and the National Indigenous Studies Portal. The search for unpublished studies included ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Google Scholar, and targeted web searches. Screening and data extraction were performed by two reviewers using templates developed by the authors. Data extraction included specific details about the population, concepts, context, and key findings or recommendations relevant to the review objectives. RESULTS: A total of a total of 1065 articles were identified and screened, with a total of 148 articles included. The majority were published in the previous five years (73%) and were from North America (78%). Most articles only focused on one of the three health equity-oriented approaches, most often harm reduction (n = 79), with only 16 articles including all three. There were 14 articles identified that also included an Indigenous-informed perspective. Almost one-half of the papers were qualitative (n = 65; 44%) and 26 papers included a framework. Of these, seven papers described a framework that included all three approaches, but none included an Indigenous-informed perspective. Recommendations for health equity-oriented approaches are: i) inclusion of people with lived and living experience; ii) multifaceted approaches to reduce stigma and discrimination; iii) recognize and address inequities; iv) drug policy reform and decriminalization; v) ensure harm-reduction principles are applied within comprehensive responses; and vi) proportionate universalism. Gaps in knowledge and areas for future research are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified few conceptual frameworks that are both health equity-oriented and incorporate multiple concepts that could enrich responses to the opioid poisoning emergency. More research is required to evaluate the impact of these integrated frameworks for action.

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.

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.

Supporting successful implementation of public health interventions: protocol for a realist synthesis.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing emphasis in public health on the importance of evidence-based interventions to improve population health and reduce health inequities. Equally important is the need for knowledge about how to implement these interventions successfully. Yet, a gap remains between the development of evidence-based public health interventions and their successful implementation. Conventional systematic reviews have been conducted on effective implementation in health care, but few in public health, so their relevance to public health is unclear. In most reviews, stringent inclusion criteria have excluded entire bodies of evidence that may be relevant for policy makers, program planners, and practitioners to understand implementation in the unique public health context. Realist synthesis is a theory-driven methodology that draws on diverse data from different study designs to explain how and why observed outcomes occur in different contexts and thus may be more appropriate for public health. METHODS: This paper presents a realist review protocol to answer the research question: Why are some public health interventions successfully implemented and others not? Based on a review of implementation theories and frameworks, we developed an initial program theory, adapted for public health from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, to explain the implementation outcomes of public health interventions within particular contexts. This will guide us through the review process, which comprises eight iterative steps based on established realist review guidelines and quality standards. We aim to refine this initial theory into a 'final' realist program theory that explains important context-mechanism-outcome configurations in the successful implementation of public health interventions. DISCUSSION: Developing new public health interventions is costly and policy windows that support their implementation can be short lived. Ineffective implementation wastes scarce resources and is neither affordable nor sustainable. Public health interventions that are not implemented will not have their intended effects on improving population health and promoting health equity. This synthesis will provide evidence to support effective implementation of public health interventions taking into account the variable context of interventions. A series of knowledge translation products specific to the needs of knowledge users will be developed to provide implementation support. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015030052.

Moderators of the relation between popularity and depressive symptoms in children: processing strength and friendship value.

Children with low (n = 25) and high (n = 38) peer-rated popularity completed an emotional Stroop task, using negative social words, a self-report measure of friendship value relative to other domains of competence, and the Child Depression Inventory (CDI). Six months later, they completed the CDI again. In regression analyses, after controlling for prior CDI scores, social status interacted significantly with both Stroop and value measures (separate regressions). For unpopular children, both greater friendship valuing and greater negative social word Stroop interference predicted increases in depressive symptoms. In contrast, neither predictor was significant for popular children. In a third regression that included friendship value and Stroop interference as joint predictors of depression change, their effects remained significant and independent. We discuss these findings' implications for 3 models of depression; Champion and Power's social-cognitive theory of depression (L. A. Champion and M. J. Power, 1995), Pyszczynski and Greenberg's self-regulatory perseveration theory of depression (T. Pyszczynski & J. Greenberg, 1992), and Harter's model of global self-worth (S. Harter, 1985).