Operationalising routinely collected patient data in research to further the pursuit of social justice and health equity: a team-based scoping review.

Abstract

Background: Vast volumes of routinely collected data (RCD) about patients are collated by health professionals. Leveraging this data - a form of real-world data - can be valuable for quality improvement and contributing to the evidence-base to inform practice. Examining routine data may be especially useful for examining issues related to social justice such as health inequities. However, little is known about the extent to which RCD is utilised in health fields and published for wider dissemination.

Objectives: The objective of this scoping review is to document the peer-reviewed published research in allied health fields which utilise RCD and evaluate the extent to which these studies have addressed issues pertaining to social justice.

Methods: An enhanced version of the Arksey and O'Malley's framework, put forth by Westphalm et al. guided the scoping review. A comprehensive literature search of three databases identified 1584 articles. Application of inclusion and exclusion criteria was piloted on 5% of the papers by three researchers. All titles and abstracts were screened independently by 2 team members, as were full texts. A data charting framework, developed to address the research questions, was piloted by three researchers with data extraction being completed by the lead researcher. A sample of papers were independently charted by a second researcher for reliability checking.

Results: One hundred and ninety papers were included in the review. The literature was diverse in terms of the professions that were represented: physiotherapy (33.7%) and psychology/mental health professions (15.8%) predominated. Many studies were first authored by clinicians (44.2%), often with clinical-academic teams. Some (33.25%) directly referenced the use of their studies to examine translation of research to practice. Few studies (14.2%) specifically tackled issues pertaining to social justice, though many collected variables that could have been utilised for this purpose.

Conclusion: Studies operationalising RCD can meaningfully address research to practice gaps and provide new evidence about issues related to social justice. However, RCD is underutilised for these purposes. Given that vast volumes of relevant data are routinely collected, more needs to be done to leverage it, which would be supported by greater acknowledgement of the value of RCD studies.