Performance measurement and evaluation of health practitioner regulation: A scoping review protocol.

IF 2.6 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2025-03-17 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0319507
Patrick Chiu, Kathleen Leslie, Gina Jang, Tracey L Adams, Natalie Thiessen, Janice Y Kung
{"title":"Performance measurement and evaluation of health practitioner regulation: A scoping review protocol.","authors":"Patrick Chiu, Kathleen Leslie, Gina Jang, Tracey L Adams, Natalie Thiessen, Janice Y Kung","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0319507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health practitioner regulation plays a fundamental role in public protection by overseeing and governing healthcare professionals to ensure they deliver safe health services. It also serves as a strategic lever to strengthen broader health system goals such as improving the accessibility of services, the sustainability of health workforces, and health system resilience. Although the goals of health practitioner regulation are easily articulated, achieving and evaluating these goals are far more challenging. Performance measurement and evaluation of professional regulators and regulatory systems are critical to improving regulatory processes and functions. This is especially important where there is rising government, public, and professional skepticism and mistrust of the effectiveness and efficiency of regulators across global jurisdictions. Although there is evidence that some health practitioner regulators and regulatory systems engage in performance measurement and evaluation, the similarities and differences remain unclear. The objective of this scoping review is to explore the nature, extent, and range of scholarship related to health practitioner regulatory performance measurement and evaluation. It will explore existing performance measurement and evaluation frameworks; the key principles and areas of focus of these frameworks; and the indicators, metrics and outcomes used to evaluate performance. The review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI guidelines for scoping reviews and will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Database searches will include Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Gray literature will be identified through leading regulatory organizations, consortiums, and think tanks. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts followed by full-text and disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis. Results will be presented using evidence tables and a narrative summary. Open Science Framework Registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/WABTF.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 3","pages":"e0319507"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11913261/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319507","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Health practitioner regulation plays a fundamental role in public protection by overseeing and governing healthcare professionals to ensure they deliver safe health services. It also serves as a strategic lever to strengthen broader health system goals such as improving the accessibility of services, the sustainability of health workforces, and health system resilience. Although the goals of health practitioner regulation are easily articulated, achieving and evaluating these goals are far more challenging. Performance measurement and evaluation of professional regulators and regulatory systems are critical to improving regulatory processes and functions. This is especially important where there is rising government, public, and professional skepticism and mistrust of the effectiveness and efficiency of regulators across global jurisdictions. Although there is evidence that some health practitioner regulators and regulatory systems engage in performance measurement and evaluation, the similarities and differences remain unclear. The objective of this scoping review is to explore the nature, extent, and range of scholarship related to health practitioner regulatory performance measurement and evaluation. It will explore existing performance measurement and evaluation frameworks; the key principles and areas of focus of these frameworks; and the indicators, metrics and outcomes used to evaluate performance. The review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI guidelines for scoping reviews and will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Database searches will include Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Gray literature will be identified through leading regulatory organizations, consortiums, and think tanks. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts followed by full-text and disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis. Results will be presented using evidence tables and a narrative summary. Open Science Framework Registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/WABTF.

卫生从业人员法规的绩效测量和评价:范围审查协议。
通过监督和管理卫生保健专业人员以确保他们提供安全的卫生服务,卫生从业人员法规在保护公众方面发挥着重要作用。它还可作为战略杠杆,加强更广泛的卫生系统目标,如改善服务的可及性、卫生人力的可持续性和卫生系统的复原力。虽然卫生从业人员监管的目标很容易明确,实现和评估这些目标更具挑战性。专业监管机构和监管体系的绩效衡量和评估对于改善监管程序和职能至关重要。这一点尤其重要,因为政府、公众和专业人士对全球各司法管辖区监管机构的有效性和效率持越来越多的怀疑和不信任态度。尽管有证据表明,一些卫生从业者监管机构和监管系统参与绩效测量和评估,但其异同仍不清楚。本综述的目的是探讨与卫生从业人员监管绩效测量和评估相关的学术研究的性质、程度和范围。它将探讨现有的绩效衡量和评价框架;这些框架的主要原则和重点领域;以及用于评估绩效的指标、标准和结果。审查将按照JBI范围审查指南进行,并将按照系统审查和范围审查扩展元分析的首选报告项目进行报告。数据库检索将包括Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus和Web of Science Core Collection。灰色文献将通过主要的监管组织、财团和智库来确定。两位独立审稿人将筛选标题和摘要,然后是全文,分歧将由第三位审稿人解决。数据将使用描述性统计和传统的内容分析进行分析。结果将使用证据表和叙述性摘要来呈现。开放科学框架注册:https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/WABTF。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信