评估加拿大高等教育中COVID-19政策的决策过程:一项关键的范围审查协议

IF 3.1 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Claudia Chaufan, Laurie Manwell, Benjamin Gabbay, Camila Heredia, Charlotte Daniels
{"title":"评估加拿大高等教育中COVID-19政策的决策过程:一项关键的范围审查协议","authors":"Claudia Chaufan, Laurie Manwell, Benjamin Gabbay, Camila Heredia, Charlotte Daniels","doi":"10.3934/publichealth.2023059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<abstract><sec> <title>Background</title> <p>Responses to COVID-19 in Canadian postsecondary education have overhauled usual norms and practices, with policies of unclear rationale implemented under the pressure of a reported public health emergency.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Objective</title> <p>To critically appraise the decision-making process informing COVID-19 policy in the postsecondary education sector.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Methods</title> <p>Our scoping review will draw from macro and micro theories of public policy, specifically the critical tradition exemplified by Carol Bacchi's approach “What is the problem represented to be” and will be guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework for scoping reviews and the team-based approach of Levan and colleagues. Data will include diverse and publicly available documents to capture multiple stakeholders' perspectives on the phenomenon of interest and will be retrieved from university newsletters and legal websites using combinations of search terms adapted to specific data types. Two reviewers will independently screen, chart, analyze and synthesize the data. Disagreements will be resolved through full team discussion.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Discussion</title> <p>Despite the unprecedented nature of the mass medical mandates implemented in the postsecondary sector and their dramatic impact on millions of lives—students, faculty, staff and their families, friends and communities—the decision-making process leading to them has not been documented or appraised. By identifying, summarizing and appraising the evidence, our review should inform practices that can contribute to effective and equitable public health policies in postsecondary institutions moving forward.</p> </sec></abstract>","PeriodicalId":45684,"journal":{"name":"AIMS Public Health","volume":"129 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appraising the decision-making process concerning COVID-19 policy in postsecondary education in Canada: A critical scoping review protocol\",\"authors\":\"Claudia Chaufan, Laurie Manwell, Benjamin Gabbay, Camila Heredia, Charlotte Daniels\",\"doi\":\"10.3934/publichealth.2023059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<abstract><sec> <title>Background</title> <p>Responses to COVID-19 in Canadian postsecondary education have overhauled usual norms and practices, with policies of unclear rationale implemented under the pressure of a reported public health emergency.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Objective</title> <p>To critically appraise the decision-making process informing COVID-19 policy in the postsecondary education sector.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Methods</title> <p>Our scoping review will draw from macro and micro theories of public policy, specifically the critical tradition exemplified by Carol Bacchi's approach “What is the problem represented to be” and will be guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework for scoping reviews and the team-based approach of Levan and colleagues. Data will include diverse and publicly available documents to capture multiple stakeholders' perspectives on the phenomenon of interest and will be retrieved from university newsletters and legal websites using combinations of search terms adapted to specific data types. Two reviewers will independently screen, chart, analyze and synthesize the data. Disagreements will be resolved through full team discussion.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Discussion</title> <p>Despite the unprecedented nature of the mass medical mandates implemented in the postsecondary sector and their dramatic impact on millions of lives—students, faculty, staff and their families, friends and communities—the decision-making process leading to them has not been documented or appraised. By identifying, summarizing and appraising the evidence, our review should inform practices that can contribute to effective and equitable public health policies in postsecondary institutions moving forward.</p> </sec></abstract>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AIMS Public Health\",\"volume\":\"129 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AIMS Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2023059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIMS Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2023059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

& lt; abstract> & lt; sec>& lt; title> Background< / title>加拿大高等教育对COVID-19的应对措施彻底改变了通常的规范和做法,在报告的突发公共卫生事件的压力下实施了理由不明确的政策。</p>& lt; / sec> & lt; sec>& lt; title> Objective< / title>< >批判性地评估为高等教育部门COVID-19政策提供信息的决策过程。</p>& lt; / sec> & lt; sec>& lt; title> Methods< / title>我们的范围审查将借鉴公共政策的宏观和微观理论,特别是以卡罗尔·巴奇的方法“问题代表是什么”为例的批判传统,并将以阿克西和奥麦利的范围审查框架以及莱文及其同事的基于团队的方法为指导。数据将包括各种公开可用的文件,以捕捉多个利益相关者对感兴趣的现象的观点,并将使用适合特定数据类型的搜索词组合从大学时事通讯和法律网站中检索。两名审稿人将独立筛选、制作图表、分析和综合数据。分歧将通过团队讨论解决。</p>& lt; / sec> & lt; sec>& lt; title> Discussion< / title>尽管在高等教育部门实施的大规模医疗任务具有前所未有的性质,并对数百万人的生活——学生、教师、员工及其家人、朋友和社区——产生了巨大影响,但导致这些任务的决策过程尚未被记录或评估。通过识别、总结和评估证据,我们的审查应为有助于推动高等教育机构制定有效和公平的公共卫生政策的做法提供信息。& lt; / sec> & lt; / abstract>
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Appraising the decision-making process concerning COVID-19 policy in postsecondary education in Canada: A critical scoping review protocol
Background

Responses to COVID-19 in Canadian postsecondary education have overhauled usual norms and practices, with policies of unclear rationale implemented under the pressure of a reported public health emergency.

Objective

To critically appraise the decision-making process informing COVID-19 policy in the postsecondary education sector.

Methods

Our scoping review will draw from macro and micro theories of public policy, specifically the critical tradition exemplified by Carol Bacchi's approach “What is the problem represented to be” and will be guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework for scoping reviews and the team-based approach of Levan and colleagues. Data will include diverse and publicly available documents to capture multiple stakeholders' perspectives on the phenomenon of interest and will be retrieved from university newsletters and legal websites using combinations of search terms adapted to specific data types. Two reviewers will independently screen, chart, analyze and synthesize the data. Disagreements will be resolved through full team discussion.

Discussion

Despite the unprecedented nature of the mass medical mandates implemented in the postsecondary sector and their dramatic impact on millions of lives—students, faculty, staff and their families, friends and communities—the decision-making process leading to them has not been documented or appraised. By identifying, summarizing and appraising the evidence, our review should inform practices that can contribute to effective and equitable public health policies in postsecondary institutions moving forward.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AIMS Public Health
AIMS Public Health HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信