Infection prevention in personal services settings: Evidence, gaps and the way forward
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Personal services is a continuously evolving industry that encompasses a variety of aesthetic treatments and personal enhancement services. Personal services are an important public health concern because delivery of service may pose potential health risks for both clients and workers. To date, there is a lack of evidence on the specific infection risks involved with personal services and the magnitude of these risks. While guidance and regulation of personal services settings do exist, they appear in varying degrees and complexity across Canada. OBJECTIVES: To summarize relevant literature on the risk of infections related to personal services; conduct an environmental scan of current provincial and territorial guidance and regulations; identify key risk mitigation measures; and summarize gaps and challenges. METHODS: A working group of national experts in the field was established for consultation on key issues. A narrative literature review was conducted to summarize findings from relevant articles. Key questions and a literature search strategy were developed and articles were screened and critically appraised for eligibility. An environmental scan of key guidelines was also conducted to identify relevant legislation and guidance. Findings from both the narrative review and environmental scan were summarized to inform guidance and identify gaps. FINDINGS: The review of the literature identified factors associated with increased risk of infection including inadequate training of personal services workers and non-compliance with established infection prevention principles. The environmental scan demonstrated that some guidelines have been developed by provincial/territorial ministries of health utilizing basic, generally accepted infection prevention principles. The established body of evidence that informs infection prevention and control recommendations is valid for health care settings; however there are factors to consider in extracting and applying such guidance to personal services settings. Major gaps and challenges remain in supporting both the advancement of infection prevention guidance and the development of enhanced regulatory frameworks, applicable to personal services settings in Canada. CONCLUSION: This review involved a comprehensive examination of relevant literature and provides a summary of issues addressing the risk of infection in personal services settings. There is a paucity of high quality evidence to support guidance, and findings reveal the need for further investigation and enhanced awareness of public health risks associated with personal services. Nonetheless, these findings can inform future research and the development of infection prevention and control guidelines and recommendations for such settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".