26 How Are We Addressing Health Equity in the Paediatric Tertiary Care Setting? An Environmental Scan of Approaches across Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Increasingly, paediatricians are asserting the urgent need for effective practices and policies to address child health inequities. Yet there is a paucity of data on the current approaches implemented in Canadian paediatric tertiary care centres. According to the Institute of Health Improvement (IHI), health equity is paramount for a just society that moves toward better well-being for all. The IHI framework lists five priorities to guide health equity initiatives: make health equity a strategic priority; develop structures and processes to support health equity work; deploy specific strategies to address the multiple determinants of health on which health care organizations can have a direct impact; decrease institutional racism within the organization; and develop partnerships with community organizations. Objectives The objectives of this study were to: 1) Map out current initiatives addressing health equity, and 2) Explore the facilitators and barriers to achieving health equity, in the tertiary paediatric health care setting in Canada. Design/Methods We conducted an environmental scan using in-depth, semi-structured interviews as well as a review of the grey and published literature. We interviewed at least one paediatric resident and one staff (including paediatricians, allied health professionals, and administrators involved in health equity) at all 17 paediatric tertiary care centres in Canada. The interview guide was structured using the IHI framework, to characterize initiatives, as well as facilitators and barriers, to address health equity. We performed a thematic analysis using NVivo. Codes were generated using an inductive and deductive approach, from which themes were identified, refined, and finalized. Results We conducted 41 interviews from Fall 2021 to Fall 2022. Recent events, including Black Lives Matter and the COVID pandemic, fuelled health equity initiatives at the hospital- and university-levels. Most institutions were in a reactionary state, with few having formal strategic approaches to address inequities. The initiatives served a variety of priority populations: Indigenous, Black, migrants, rural communities, and children with disabilities, with the focus differing based on geography and the unique challenges faced by each institution. To achieve equity throughout an organization, equity at the staffing level was identified as being a necessity. The barriers to implementing health equity initiatives included lack of accountability, lack of leadership support, limited resources, and lack of institutional awareness. The facilitators included leadership support, health equity champions, and increasing awareness and resources. Conclusion A myriad of health equity initiatives are taking place in Canadian paediatric tertiary care centres, which are evolving.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,013 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,034 | 0,026 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».