Search

The Internet of Things (IoT) is expanding rapidly and can potentially be a huge data source. This study aimed to close the knowledge gap about possible IoT applications in health care. English-language academic publications from the Web of Science (WoS) were used for the present study. Bibliometric networks were used to analyze pertinent publications to examine the connections between authors, nations, and affiliations. Papers on digital health care have been published in more than 1195 sources, among which the most popular was the Journal of Medical Internet Research. Six top institutions were from the Netherlands, making the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam the most productive institution after Australia and England. This study provides an overview of IoT-related research conducted in digital health care, helping academic researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to better understand the development of digital health care research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study presents a global research scenario in the broad domain of osteoarthritis (OA) research, using quantitative and qualitative publication and citation indicators. Methods: The study is based on 45,368 global publications, sourced from the Scopus bibliographical database, covering three decades (1994–2023). We studied the performance of the top 12 developed and top 12 developing countries. The key countries, organizations and authors at national and international levels were identified. The broad subject areas and key journals contributing to global OA research were delineated, besides identifying the broad characteristics of highly cited papers in the field. Results: The United States and China were the most productive countries, while the Netherlands and Canada made the largest citation impact. Harvard Medical School and the University of Sydney made the most contribution, while Boston University and Pfizer Inc., USA registered the highest citation impact. Hunter DJ and Guermazi A were the most productive authors, while Lohmander LS, and Hochberg MC registered the highest citation impact. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (n = 4879) and Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (n = 786) published the maximum papers, while Arthritis and Rheumatism and Nature Reviews Rheumatology registered the largest citation impact. The highly cited papers with 100 or more citations constituted 6.25% of the total publications. Conclusions: There has been a systematic growth of publications on OA. The research on OA was mainly done in developed countries, with the maximum publications coming from the United States of America, China and Canada. The most impactful publications on OA were from the Netherlands, Canada and the United States of America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite increases in Indigenous enrolment in post-secondary institutions (PSIs) in British Columbia, Canada, there are significant disparities in Indigenous student access, retention, and success in work-integrated learning (WIL) programs. By analyzing Indigenous-specific WIL literature, this article identifies existing barriers to Indigenous WIL as well as unrealized opportunities to expand and transform WIL approaches and practices. Based on these findings, the paper offers 10 recommendations for the development of resources and strategic Indigenous WIL initiatives, recommendations that also served to guide the creation of a publicly-accessible Indigenous WIL Resource Hub (IRH). However, the literature review also revealed limitations to academic publishing and challenges in institutional reporting. Accounting for these scholarly limitations and recognizing the value of on-the-ground and community-held knowledge, the directives guiding the IRH and shared in this article's conclusions are based on the understanding that initiatives to act on opportunities and address barriers must be needs-based and community-specific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patient engagement in patient‐oriented research (POR) is described as patients collaborating as active and equal research team members (patient research partners [PRPs]) on the health research projects and activities that matter to them. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Canada's federal funding agency for health research, asks that patients be included as partners early, often and at as many stages of the health research process as possible. The objective of this POR project was to co‐build an interactive, hands‐on training programme that could support PRPs in understanding the processes, logistics and roles of CIHR grant funding applications. We also conducted a patient engagement evaluation, capturing the experiences of the PRPs in co‐building the training programme. Methods: This multiphased POR study included a Working Group of seven PRPs with diverse health and health research experiences and two staff members from the Patient Engagement Team. Seven Working Group sessions were held over the 3‐month period from June to August 2021. The Working Group worked synchronously (meeting weekly online via Zoom) as well as asynchronously. A patient engagement evaluation was conducted after the conclusion of the Working Group sessions using a validated survey and semi‐structured interviews. Survey data were analysed descriptively and interview data were analysed thematically. Results: The Working Group co‐built and co‐delivered the training programme about the CIHR grant application process for PRPs and researchers in five webinars and workshops. For the evaluation of patient engagement within the Working Group, five out of seven PRPs completed the survey and four participated in interviews. From the survey, most PRPs agreed/strongly agreed to having communication and supports to engage in the Working Group. The main themes identified from the interviews were working together‐communication and supports; motivations for joining and staying; challenges to contributing; and impact of the Working Group. Conclusion: This training programme supports and builds capacity for PRPs to understand the grant application process and offers ways by which they can highlight the unique experience and contribution they can bring to each project. Our co‐build process presents an example and highlights the need for inclusive approaches, flexibility and individual thinking and application. Patient or Public Contribution: The objective of this project was to identify the aspects of the CIHR grant funding application that were elemental to having PRPs join grant funding applications and subsequently funded projects, in more active and meaningful roles, and then to co‐build a training programme that could support PRPs to do so. We used the CIHR SPOR Patient Engagement Framework, and included time and trust, in our patient engagement approaches to building a mutually respectful and reciprocal co‐learning space. Our Working Group included seven PRPs who contributed to the development of a training programme. We suggest that our patient engagement and partnership approaches, or elements of, could serve as a useful resource for co‐building more PRP‐centred learning programmes and tools going forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public health is tasked with addressing the urgent global priority of promoting the health and human rights of adults engaged in sex work and research is critical to support this endeavor. 'What' is studied, 'how' research is done, and 'who' is centered in this research is reflected in how research funding is allocated. In this article, we interrogate funding allocation for sex work-related health research in Canada. Drawing on critical perspectives aimed at illustrating how stigma operates in society, we examine operating grants (N = 64) awarded by the federal health research funding agency between 2003 and 2020. We find that sex workers' health is problematized disproportionately in a street marketplace context that centers on HIV and sexually transmitted infections. Limited work attends to the socio-structural context of sex work and instead perpetuates stigmatizing narratives about sex work. Public health intervention studies are rare, presenting a barrier for implementing and evaluating evidence-based health promotion strategies. Notably, the research projects were conducted by a small number of highly networked, geographically clustered researchers, illustrating gaps in research that considers the complexity of sex work. We propose that it is essential to consider funding as a process that may be limiting the range of health issues being addressed and privileging a small community of researchers, which can inadvertently serve to worsen health inequities among some sex work communities. Researchers and funding bodies may draw on this analysis to inform a research agenda that meaningfully supports the health, safety, and well-being of sex workers in Canada and globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite efforts toward equity, diversity, and inclusion in academic ophthalmology faculties, gender disparity continues to exist. Current evidence indicates that female ophthalmologists consistently hold lower academic ranks and receive less funding from the National Institutes of Health compared to their male colleagues. The extent of this disparity is unknown in the Canadian context. We sought to characterize the gender gap in Canadian Institutes of Health Research funding among ophthalmologists. From inception, funding decision data were collected from the official Canadian Institutes of Health Research website database hosted by the Government of Canada. Measures including gender, number of grants held over the study period, number of simultaneous grants, and total funding were collected. Female ophthalmologists were consistently awarded fewer grants (21.43 percent) compared to male counterparts and were less likely to hold multiple grants since 2008. An over five-fold disparity was found in total funding for female compared to male ophthalmologists. As well, females were less likely than males to hold a grant in each particular year except in 2020. Female ophthalmologists continue to face barriers to attaining academic support from Canadian Institute of Health Research funds. Continued action to mitigate this gender gap may improve gender-based parity in federal research funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mental health research in Canada is not only underfunded but there remains an inequitable distribution of funding to address unmet needs especially in clinical and applied research. In 2018, the legalization of cannabis for non-medical use in Canada sparked the need to examine the relationship between cannabis use and mental health. The federal government allocated $10 M over 5 years to the Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC), a pan-Canadian health organization funded at arm's length by the federal government. Methods: In 2020, the MHCC implemented an innovative community-based research (CBR) program to investigate this relationship among priority populations including people who use cannabis and live with mental illness, First Nations, Inuit and Métis, two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and/or queer (2SLGBTQ+) individuals, and racialized populations. Extensive consultations, a scoping review and an environmental scan set the research agenda. Key program components included a review committee with representation from diverse priority populations, extensive proposal-writing support for applicants, and capacity bridging workshops for the 14 funded projects. Results: Of the 14 funded research projects, 6 focus on and are led by Indigenous communities, 5 focus on other equity-seeking populations, and 9 explore the perceived patterns, influence and effects of use including benefits and harms. Lessons learned include the importance of a health equity lens and diverse sources of knowledge setting the CBR research agenda. In addition to capacity bridging that promote equitable roles among knowledge co-producers as well as the critical role of organizational support in increasing research productivity, especially in the area of mental health and cannabis use where there is a need for more applied research. Conclusion: Centering equity and lived and living experience strengthened the rationale for investments and ensured user-led evidence generation and utilization – a key public health gain. Organizational support for proposal development and capacity bridging yields significant value that can be replicated in future CBR initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outdoor learning offers clear physical, cognitive, social-emotional and academic benefits for children and yet, it is considered a grassroots approach to teaching and learning in elementary schools. We examined teachers' perspectives on barriers and supports for outdoor learning in public elementary schools. Thirty-six teachers in (urban and rural) British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario (all female; Mean age = 43.84, SD = 10) participated in one of five virtually administered, semi-structured focus groups. Questions/prompts facilitated a discussion on teachers' experiences with barriers and supports for outdoor learning. Thematic analysis was used to identify main themes. Four interrelated themes and further sub-themes were found: 1) Teacher characteristics: interest/motivation to teach outdoors, preparedness, confidence in handling risks; 2) Systemic factors: principal support, school/district policies, funding/resources, curriculum, school schedule; 3) Culture: school culture, societal beliefs about education, family backgrounds; 4) Environmental factors: weather, built/natural environment, hazards. Systemic support is needed to integrate outdoor learning in schools. The findings in this study are relevant to health education specialists particularly focused on elementary school education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]