Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity). METHODS: Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist. All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework. RESULTS: We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .

Leveraging systematic review practice for research skill development in an undergraduate science course: a case study.

Information literacy skills are an important part of research skills for undergraduate science students. This case study presents a novel approach to developing these types of research skills. By deconstructing the research process into separate steps, explicitly defining, and practicing the skills involved, students can progressively develop these skills and apply them. In this course, systematic reviews are used as exemplars for the research process. We align the Research Skills Development Framework with the steps of a systematic review and present specific skills and accompanying activities for each step. This workshop-based course emphasizes skill development and can help overcome assessments that rely solely on a final paper, with no record or evidence of the student research process, that could be created by a generative artificial intelligence tool.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study presents a novel approach to teaching undergraduate science students rigorous research skills with scaffolded systematic review practice.

COVID-19 Public Health Restrictions and New Mothers' Mental Health: A Qualitative Scoping Review.

Public health restrictions to protect physical health during the COVID-19 pandemic had unintended effects on mental health, which may have disproportionately affected some potentially vulnerable groups. This scoping review of qualitative research provides a narrative synthesis of new mothers' perspectives on their mental health during COVID-19 pandemic restrictions through pregnancy to the postpartum period. Database searches in PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO sought primary research studies published until February 2023, which focused on new mothers' self-perceived mental health during the pandemic (N = 55). Our synthesis found that new mothers' mental health was impacted by general public health restrictions resulting in isolation from family and friends, a lack of community support, and impacts on the immediate family. However, public health restrictions specific to maternal and infant healthcare were most often found to negatively impact maternal mental health, namely, hospital policies prohibiting the presence of birthing partners and in-person care for their infants. This review of qualitative research adds depth to previous reviews that have solely examined the quantitative associations between COVID-19 public health restrictions and new mothers' mental health. Here, our review demonstrates the array of adverse impacts of COVID-19 public health restrictions on new mothers' mental health throughout pregnancy into the postpartum period, as reported by new mothers. These findings may be beneficial for policy makers in future public health emergency planning when evaluating the impacts and unintended consequences of public health restrictions on new mothers.

Spatial datasets of 30-year (1991-2020) average monthly total precipitation and minimum/maximum temperature for Canada and the United States.

Thin plate smoothing spline models, covering Canada and the continental United States, were developed using ANUSPLIN for 30-year (1991-2020) monthly mean maximum and minimum temperature and precipitation. These models employed monthly weather station values from the North American dataset published by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). Maximum temperature mean absolute errors (MAEs) ranged between 0.54 °C and 0.64 °C (approaching measurement error), while minimum temperature MAEs were slightly higher, varying from 0.87 °C to 1.0 °C. On average, thirty-year precipitation estimates were accurate to within approximately 10 % of total precipitation levels, ranging from 9.0 % in the summer to 12.2 % in the winter. Error rates were higher in Canada compared to estimates in the United States, consistent with a less dense station network in Canada relative to the United States. Precipitation estimates in Canada exhibited MAEs representing 14.7 % of mean total precipitation compared to 9.7 % in the United States. The datasets exhibited minimal bias overall; 0.004 °C for maximum temperature, 0.01 °C for minimum temperature, and 0.5 % for precipitation. Winter months showed a greater dry bias (0.8 % of total winter precipitation) compared to other seasons (-0.4 % of precipitation). These 30-year gridded datasets are available at ∼2 km resolution.

Searching and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: A systematic assessment of current methods.

The search methods used in systematic reviews provide the foundation for establishing the body of literature from which conclusions are drawn and recommendations made. Searches should aim to be comprehensive and reporting of search methods should be transparent and reproducible. Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews strive to adhere to the best methodological guidance available for this type of searching. The current work aims to provide an assessment of the conduct and reporting of searches in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews. Our objectives were to examine how searches are currently conducted in Campbell systematic reviews, how search strategies, search methods and search reporting adhere to the Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) and PRISMA standards, and identify emerging or novel methods used in searching in Campbell systematic reviews. We also investigated the role of information specialists in Campbell systematic reviews. We handsearched the Campbell Systematic Reviews journal tables of contents from January 2017 to March 2024. We included all systematic reviews published since 2017. We excluded other types of evidence synthesis (e.g., evidence and gap maps), updates to systematic reviews when search methods were not changed from the original pre-2017 review, and systematic reviews that did not conduct their own original searches. We developed a data extraction form in part based on the conduct and reporting items in MECCIR and PRISMA. In addition, we extracted information about the general quality of searches based on the use of Boolean operators, keywords, database syntax and subject headings. Data extraction included information about reporting of sources searched, some aspects of search quality, the use and reporting of supplementary search methods, reporting of the search strategy, the involvement of information specialists, date of the most recent search, and citation of the Campbell search methods guidance. Items were rated as fully, partially or not conducted or reported. We cross-walked our data extraction items to the 2019 MECCIR standards and 2020 PRISMA guidelines and provide descriptive analyses of the conduct and reporting of searches in Campbell systematic reviews, indicating level of adherence to standards where applicable. We included 111 Campbell systematic reviews across all coordinating groups published since 2017 up to the search date. Almost all (98%) included reviews searched at least two relevant databases and all reported the databases searched. All reviews searched grey literature and most (82%) provided a full list of grey literature sources. Detailed information about databases such as platform and date range coverage was lacking in 16% and 77% of the reviews, respectively. In terms of search strategies, most used Boolean operators, search syntax and phrase searching correctly, but subject headings in databases with controlled vocabulary were used in only about half of the reviews. Most reviews reported at least one full database search strategy (90%), with 63% providing full search strategies for all databases. Most reviews conducted some supplementary searching, most commonly searching the references of included studies, whereas handsearching of journals and forward citation searching were less commonly reported (51% and 62%, respectively). Twenty-nine percent of reviews involved an information specialist co-author and about 45% did not mention the involvement of any information specialist. When information specialists were co-authors, there was a concomitant increase in adherence to many reporting and conduct standards and guidelines, including reporting website URLs, reporting methods for forward citation searching, using database syntax correctly and using subject headings. No longitudinal trends in adherence to conducting and reporting standards were found and the Campbell search methods guidance published in 2017 was cited in only twelve reviews. We also found a median time lag of 20 months between the most recent search and the publication date. In general, the included Campbell systematic reviews searched a wide range of bibliographic databases and grey literature, and conducted at least some supplementary searching such as searching references of included studies or contacting experts. Reporting of mandatory standards was variable with some frequently unreported (e.g., website URLs and database date ranges) and others well reported in most reviews. For example, database search strategies were reported in detail in most reviews. For grey literature, source names were well reported but search strategies were less so. The findings will be used to identify opportunities for advancing current practices in Campbell reviews through updated guidance, peer review processes and author training and support.

The Secret Sauce? Taking the Mystery Out of Scaling-Up School-Based Physical Activity Interventions.

Over the last 4 decades, physical activity researchers have invested heavily in determining "what works" to promote healthy behaviors in schools. Single and multicomponent school-based interventions that target physical education, active transportation, and/or classroom activity breaks effectively increased physical activity among children and youth. Yet, few of these interventions are ever scaled-up and implemented under real-world conditions and in diverse populations. To achieve population-level health benefits, there is a need to design school-based health-promoting interventions for scalability and to consider key aspects of the scale-up process. In this opinion piece, we aim to identify challenges and advance knowledge and action toward scaling-up school-based physical activity interventions. We highlight the key roles of planning for scale-up at the outset, scale-up pathways, trust among partners and program support, program adaptation, evaluation of scale-up, and barriers and facilitators to scaling-up. We draw upon our experience scaling-up effective school-based interventions and provide a solid foundation from which others can work toward bridging the implementation-to-scale-up gap.

ER-Targeted PET for Initial Staging and Suspected Recurrence in ER-Positive Breast Cancer.

Importance: There are insufficient data comparing 16α-18F-fluoro-17ß-estradiol (FES) positron emission tomography (PET) computed tomography (CT) with standard-of-care imaging (SOC) for staging locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or evaluating suspected recurrence. Objective: To determine the detection rate of FES PET/CT and SOC for distant metastases in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive LABC and recurrences in patients with ER-positive BC and suspected recurrence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study was conducted as a single-center phase 2 trial, from January 2021 to September 2023. The study design provided 80% power to find a 20% detection rate difference. Participants included patients with ER-positive LABC (cohort 1) or suspected recurrence (cohort 2). Data were analyzed from September 2023 to February 2024. Exposure: Participants underwent both SOC imaging and experimental FES PET/CT. When there were suspicious lesions on imaging, 1 was biopsied for histopathological reference standard to confirm presence (true positive) or absence (false positive) of malignant neoplasm. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome of interest was the detection rate of FES PET CT vs SOC for distant metastases and recurrences. Results: A total of 124 patients were accrued, with 62 in cohort 1 (median [IQR] age, 52 [32-84] years) and 62 in cohort 2 (median [IQR] age, 66 [30-93] years). In cohort 1, of 14 true-positive findings, SOC imaging detected 12 and FES detected 11 (P > .99). In cohort 2, of 23 true-positive findings, SOC detected 16 and FES detected 18 (P = .77). In 30 patients with lobular histology, of 11 true-positive findings, SOC detected 5 and FES detected 9 (P = .29). There were 6 false-positive findings on SOC and 1 false-positive finding on FES PET/CT (P = .13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this diagnostic study with pathological findings as the reference standard, no difference was found between FES PET/CT and current SOC imaging for detecting distant metastases in patients with ER-positive LABC or recurrences in patients with ER-positive tumors and suspected recurrence. FES PET/CT could be considered for both clinical indications, which are not part of current Appropriate Use Criteria for FES PET. The findings regarding FES PET/CT in patients with lobular tumors, and for lower false positives than current SOC imaging, warrant further investigation.

Sedentary behavior does not predict low BMD nor fracture-population-based Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study.

Sedentary behavior (SB) or sitting is associated with multiple unfavorable health outcomes. Bone tissue responds to imposed gravitational and muscular strain with there being some evidence suggesting a causal link between SB and poor bone health. However, there are no population-based data on the longitudinal relationship between SB, bone change, and incidence of fragility fractures. This study aimed to examine the associations of sitting/SB (defined as daily sitting time), areal BMD (by DXA), and incident low trauma (fragility) osteoporotic fractures (excluding hands, feet, face, and head). We measured baseline (1995-7) and 10-yr self-reported SB, femoral neck (FN), total hip (TH), and lumbar spine (L1-L4) BMD in 5708 women and 2564 men aged 25 to 80+ yr from the population-based, nationwide, 9-center Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. Incident 10-yr fragility fracture data were obtained from 4624 participants; >80% of fractures were objectively confirmed by medical records or radiology reports. Vertebral fractures were confirmed by qualitative morphological methods. All analyses were stratified by sex. Multivariable regression models assessed SB-BMD relationships; Cox proportional models were fit for fracture risk. Models were adjusted for age, height, BMI, physical activity, and sex-specific covariates. Women in third/fourth quartiles had lower adjusted FN BMD versus women with the least SB (first quartile); women in the SB third quartile had lower adjusted TH BMD. Men in the SB third quartile had lower adjusted FN BMD than those in SB first quartile. Neither baseline nor stable 10-yr SB was related to BMD change nor to incident fragility fractures. Increased sitting (SB) in this large, population-based cohort was associated with lower baseline FN BMD. Stable SB was not associated with 10-yr BMD loss nor increased fragility fracture. In conclusion, habitual adult SB was not associated with subsequent loss of BMD nor increased risk of fracture.

The number of hours of sitting in a day (often called "sedentary behavior") is currently understood to be "bad for bone health" both because of increased bone loss and a higher risk for fractures. Very few studies in randomly sampled men and women from a whole population have consistently asked about hours of sitting and examined baseline bone density. Fewer still have compared hours of sitting and its changes over 10 yr with changes in bone density and the number of new fractures that occurred. The Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study obtained sitting hours from 5708 women and 2564 men aged 25 to 80+ yr and compared it with the spine, total hip (TH), and femoral neck (FN) bone density values. The average sitting at 7.4 h in men was associated with slightly lower adjusted femoral neck bone density; in women, sitting 6.7 h/d was associated with slightly lower adjusted FN and TH bone density. Ten-year follow-up data (now in about 5000 people) showed no relationship between the slightly longer sitting (an increase of 18% in men and 22% in women) and bone loss or new bone fractures. In this large country-wide population-based study, hours of sitting each day were not associated with 10-yr BMD loss in women or men nor did sitting more associate with new bone fractures. These data are reassuring; women and men who walk regularly and have some moderate-vigorous physical activity each day, despite more sitting, do not seem to be at greater risk for osteoporosis.