Advertisement

Methodological guidance for incorporating equity when informing rapid-policy and guideline development

  • Author Footnotes
    1 Joint co-first authors.
    Omar Dewidar
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author. Bruyère Research Institute, 1502-1541 Lycee Place, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1G 4E2, Tel./fax: +1-613-501-0632.
    Footnotes
    1 Joint co-first authors.
    Affiliations
    Bruyère Research Institute, University of Ottawa, 85 Primrose Ave, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6M1, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Author Footnotes
    1 Joint co-first authors.
    Brenda Allen Kawala
    Footnotes
    1 Joint co-first authors.
    Affiliations
    Section for Epidemiology and Social Medicine, Department of Public Health, Institute of Medicine-Master in Global Health, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 414, SE-405 Gothenburg, Sweden
    Search for articles by this author
  • Alba Antequera
    Affiliations
    Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, 08025 Barcelona, Spain
    Search for articles by this author
  • Andrea C. Tricco
    Affiliations
    Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria St, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1T8, Canada

    Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health & Institute of Health, Management, and Policy Evaluation, University of Toronto, 27 King's College Circle, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1, Canada

    Queen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality, Joanna Briggs Institute Centre of Excellence, Queen's University, 92 Barrie Street, Room 214, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • David Tovey
    Affiliations
    Cochrane France, Paris, France
    Search for articles by this author
  • Sharon Straus
    Affiliations
    Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria St, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1T8, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Rebecca Glover
    Affiliations
    Department of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK
    Search for articles by this author
  • Janice Tufte
    Affiliations
    Hassanah Consulting, Seattle, WA 98122, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Olivia Magwood
    Affiliations
    Bruyère Research Institute, University of Ottawa, 85 Primrose Ave, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6M1, Canada

    Interdisciplinary School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Thompson Hall, 25 University Private, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1N 7K4
    Search for articles by this author
  • Maureen Smith
    Affiliations
    Cochrane Consumer Executive, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Cheow Peng Ooi
    Affiliations
    Endocrine Unit, Department of Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Anna Dion
    Affiliations
    Centre for Implementation Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Mireille Goetghebeur
    Affiliations
    Unit Methods, Ethics and Participation, INESSS, National Institute for Excellence in Health and Social Services, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Ludovic Reveiz
    Affiliations
    Evidence and Intelligence for Action in Health Department, Incident Management System for the Covid-19 Response. Pan American Health Organization, 525 23rd St, Northwest, WA 20037-2895, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Stefano Negrini
    Affiliations
    Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University “La Statale”, Milan, Italy

    IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
    Search for articles by this author
  • Peter Tugwell
    Affiliations
    Department of Medicine, and School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    WHO Collaborating Centre for Knowledge Translation and Health Technology Assessment in Health Equity, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Jennifer Petkovic
    Affiliations
    Bruyère Research Institute, University of Ottawa, 85 Primrose Ave, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6M1, Canada

    WHO Collaborating Centre for Knowledge Translation and Health Technology Assessment in Health Equity, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Vivian Welch
    Affiliations
    Bruyère Research Institute, University of Ottawa, 85 Primrose Ave, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6M1, Canada

    School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, 600 Peter Morand Crescent, Ottawa, Ontario K1G 5Z3, Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • on behalf ofCOVID-END Equity Task Force
  • Author Footnotes
    1 Joint co-first authors.

      Abstract

      Objectives

      We provide guidance for considering equity in rapid reviews through examples of published COVID-19 rapid reviews.

      Study Design and Setting

      This guidance was developed based on a series of methodological meetings, review of internationally renowned guidance such as the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-Equity) guideline. We identified Exemplar rapid reviews by searching COVID-19 databases and requesting examples from our team.

      Results

      We proposed the following key steps: 1. involve relevant stakeholders with lived experience in the conduct and design of the review; 2. reflect on equity, inclusion and privilege in team values and composition; 3. develop research question to assess health inequities; 4. conduct searches in relevant disciplinary databases; 5. collect data and critically appraise recruitment, retention and attrition for populations experiencing inequities; 6. analyse evidence on equity; 7. evaluate the applicability of findings to populations experiencing inequities; and 8. adhere to reporting guidelines for communicating review findings. We illustrated these methods through rapid review examples.

      Conclusion

      Implementing this guidance could contribute to improving equity considerations in rapid reviews produced in public health emergencies, and help policymakers better understand the distributional impact of diseases on the population.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Glover R.E.
        • van Schalkwyk M.C.I.
        • Akl E.A.
        • Kristjannson E.
        • Lotfi T.
        • Petkovic J.
        • et al.
        A framework for identifying and mitigating the equity harms of COVID-19 policy interventions.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2020; 128: 35-48https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.004
        • Wang Z.
        • Tang K.
        Combating COVID-19: health equity matters.
        Nat Med. 2020; 26: 458https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0823-6
        • Blumenshine P.
        • Reingold A.
        • Egerter S.
        • Mockenhaupt R.
        • Braveman P.
        • Marks J.
        Pandemic influenza planning in the United States from a health disparities perspective.
        Emerg Infect Dis. 2008; 14: 709-715https://doi.org/10.3201/eid.1405.071301
        • Lorenc T.
        • Oliver K.
        Adverse effects of public health interventions: a conceptual framework.
        J Epidemiol Community Health. 2014; 68: 288-290https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2013-203118
      1. How COVID-19 impacts women and girls. UN Women.
      2. World economic situation and prospects: April 2020 briefing, No. 136. United Nations.
        (Available at)
      3. Risk for COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death by race/ethnicity. Centers for disease control and prevention (CDC).
        (Available at)
        • Krishnaratne S.
        • Pfadenhauer L.M.
        • Coenen M.
        • Geffert K.
        • Jung-Sievers C.
        • Klinger C.
        • et al.
        Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020; 12: CD013812https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013812
        • Shakespeare T.
        • Ndagire F.
        • Seketi Q.E.
        Triple jeopardy: disabled people and the COVID-19 pandemic.
        Lancet. 2021; 397: 1331-1333https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00625-5
        • Negrini S.
        • Grabljevec K.
        • Boldrini P.
        • Kiekens C.
        • Moslavac S.
        • Zampolini M.
        • et al.
        Up to 2.2 million people experiencing disability suffer collateral damage each day of COVID-19 lockdown in Europe.
        Eur J Phys Rehabil Med Jun. 2020; 56: 361-365https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06361-3
        • Corbie-Smith G.
        Vaccine hesitancy is a scapegoat for structural racism.
        JAMA Health Forum. 2021; 2: e210434https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.0434
        • Welch V.
        • Petticrew M.
        • Tugwell P.
        • Moher D.
        • O’Neill J.
        • Waters E.
        • et al.
        • the PRISMA-Equity Bellagio group
        PRISMA-Equity 2012 extension: reporting guidelines for systematic reviews with a focus on health equity.
        Plos Med. 2012; 9: e1001333https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001333
        • Rehfuess E.A.
        • Stratil J.M.
        • Scheel I.B.
        • Portela A.
        • Norris S.L.
        • Baltussen R.
        The WHO-INTEGRATE evidence to decision framework version 1.0: integrating WHO norms and values and a complexity perspective.
        BMJ Glob Health. 2019; 4: e000844https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000844
        • Welch V.A.
        • Petkovic J.
        • Jull J.
        • Hartling L.
        • Klassen T.
        • Kristjansson E.
        • et al.
        Equity and specific populations.
        Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 2019. Wiley Online Books, Hoboken, NJ2019: 433-449
        • Kelly C.
        • Kasperavicius D.
        • Duncan D.
        • Etherington C.
        • Giangregorio L.
        • Presseau J.
        • et al.
        ‘Doing’ or ‘using’ intersectionality? Opportunities and challenges in incorporating intersectionality into knowledge translation theory and practice.
        Int J Equity Health. 2021; 20: 187https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01509-z
        • Bell R.J.
        Evidence synthesis in the time of COVID-19.
        Climacteric. 2021; 24: 211-213https://doi.org/10.1080/13697137.2021.1904676
        • Aristovnik A.
        • Ravšelj D.
        • Umek L.
        A bibliometric analysis of COVID-19 across science and social science research landscape.
        Sustainability. 2020; 12https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219132
        • Tricco A.C.
        • Antony J.
        • Zarin W.
        • Strifler L.
        • Ghassemi M.
        • Ivory J.
        • et al.
        A scoping review of rapid review methods.
        BMC Med. 2015; 13: 224https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6
        • Cottrell E.
        • Whitlock E.
        • Kato E.
        • Uhl S.
        • Belinson S.
        • Chang C.
        • et al.
        AHRQ methods for effective health care.
        Defining the benefits of stakeholder engagement in systematic reviews. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Rockville, MD2014
        • Concannon T.W.
        • Grant S.
        • Welch V.
        • Petkovic J.
        • Selby J.
        • Crowe S.
        • et al.
        Practical guidance for involving stakeholders in health research.
        J Gen Intern Med. 2019; 34: 458-463https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-018-4738-6
        • Harris J.
        • Croot L.
        • Thompson J.
        • Springett J.
        How stakeholder participation can contribute to systematic reviews of complex interventions.
        J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016; 70: 207-214https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2015-205701
        • COVID-END
        (Available at)
        • Alliance S.E.
        Reflective equity, diversity and inclusion exercise.
        (Available at)
      4. Work plan and budget proposal. COVID-END.
        (Available at)
        • Welch V.
        • Petticrew M.
        • Petkovic J.
        • Waters E.
        • White H.
        • the PRISMA-Equity Bellagio group
        Extending the PRISMA statement to equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012): explanation and elaboration.
        Int J Equity Health. 2015; 14: 92https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-015-0219-2
        • Heidari S.
        • Babor T.F.
        • De Castro P.
        • Tort S.
        • Curno M.
        Sex and gender equity in research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use.
        Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016; 1: 2https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6
        • Crenshaw K.
        Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color.
        Stanford L Rev. 1991; 43: 1241-1299https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
        • Carbado D.W.
        • Crenshaw K.W.
        • Mays V.M.
        • Tomlinson B.
        Intersectionality: mapping the movements of a theory.
        Du Bois Rev. 2013; 10: 303-312https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X13000349
        • O’Neill J.
        • Tabish H.
        • Welch V.
        • Petticrew M.
        • Pottie K.
        • Clarke M.
        • et al.
        Applying an equity lens to interventions: using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67: 56-64https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.005
      5. National collaborating centre for methods and tools.
        (Available at)
        https://www.nccmt.ca/
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
      6. COVID-END - resources to support decision-makers.
        (Available at)
      7. SPOR evidence alliance.
        (Available at)
        https://sporevidencealliance.ca/
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
      8. Bacon SL, Ribero PAB, Stojanovic J, Joyal-Desmarais K, Vieira AM, Yip D. Change in the level of vaccine protection over time in COVID-19 vaccinated individuals: a rapid review. Submitted to Public Health Agency of Canada in September, 2021.

        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        What are the risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes in children 12 years and under? 2021.
        (Available at)
        • Egunsola O.
        • Farkas B.
        • Flanagan J.
        • Salmon C.
        • Mastikhina L.
        Clement FM Behalf Univ Calgary Health Technology Assess Unit. Surveill COVID-19 a Vaccinated Popul A Rapid Lit Rev.
        2021
      9. Badea A, Groot G, Reeder B, Young C, Ellsworth C, Howell-Spooner B How to deliver remote ICU care for COVID-19 patients to avoid/prevent transfer from smaller communities to tertiary care hospitals. 2021 Apr 6 Document no.: CC210301 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 13p. (CEST rapid review report). Saskatchewan, Canada: Saskatchewan: Health Authority, University of Saskatchewan.

        • Crawshaw J.
        • Konnyu K.
        • Castillo G.
        • Allen Z.A.
        • Smith M.
        • Trehan N.
        • et al.
        Factors affecting COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and uptake among the general public: a living behavioural science evidence synthesis.
        (Available at)
      10. Badea, A; Groot, G; Young, C; Mueller, M. What have been the consequences of delayed surgeries due to the COVID-19 pandemic? 2021 Oct 18. Document no.: EOC210903 RR Table. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2021. [CEST Table)].

        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        What is known about reasons for vaccine confidence and uptake in populations experiencing inequities?.
        (Available at)
        https://res.nccmt.ca/res-vaccine-confidence-EN
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
        • Wallerstein N.B.
        • Duran B.
        Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities.
        Health Promot Pract. 2006; 7: 312-323https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839906289376
        • Parker R.
        • Tomlinson E.
        • Concannon T.W.
        • Akl E.
        • Jennifer J.
        • Welch V.A.
        • et al.
        Factors to Consider During Identification and Invitationof Individuals in a Multi-stakeholder Research Partnership.
        J Gen Intern Medicine. 2022; (In press)https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-022-07411-w
      11. Webinars SPOR evidence alliance.
        (Available at)
      12. SAN’YAS anti-racism indigenous cultural safety training program.
        (Available at)
        https://sanyas.ca/
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
      13. Leading for equity: teams. National equity project.
        (Available at)
      14. Patient and public partner engagement in research - SPOR evidence alliance.
        (Available at)
        • Oliver S.
        • Roche C.
        • Stewart R.
        • Bangpan M.
        • Dickson K.
        • Pells K.
        • et al.
        Stakeholder engagement for development impact evaluation and evidence synthesis. 3. CEDIL, London, UK2018
      15. Recommendations on patient engagement compensation prepared by the SPOR networks in chronic diseases and the PICHI network.

      16. OSSU interim guidance on compensation for patient partners in research.

      17. Should money come into it? A tool for deciding whether to pay patient-engagement participants.
        (Available at)
        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        Rapid diagnostic testing for COVID-19 in a fully vaccinated population.
        (Available at)
        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        Pandemic preparedness, response, and recovery in rural, remote, and northern regions.
        2020 (Available at)
        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        Rapid review: what is known about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on indigenous communities in Canada?.
        2020 (Available at)
        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        Pandemic impact on healthcare workforce.
        2021 (Available at)
        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        Preparedness and response measures to mitigate the health and socioeconomic impacts of epidemics on women, children and adolescents: a rapid review.
        2021 (Available at)
        • CfMP Research
        Impact of COVID-19 on the Muslim community: a rapid review.
        2020 (Available at)
        • Moran C.
        • Campbell D.J.T.
        • Campbell T.S.
        • Roach P.
        • Bourassa L.
        • Collins Z.
        • et al.
        Predictors of attitudes and adherence to COVID-19 public health guidelines in Western countries: a rapid review of the emerging literature.
        J Public Health (Oxford, England). 2021; 43 (fdab070): 739-753https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdab070
        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        Mitigating unintended harms of COVID-19 public health measures among low income populations.
        2020 (Available at)
      18. National collaborating centre for methods and tools. Transmission. 2021 (Available at)
        • Lebrasseur A.
        • Fortin-Bédard N.
        • Lettre J.
        • Bussières E.L.
        • Best K.
        • Boucher N.
        • et al.
        Impact of COVID-19 on people with physical disabilities: a rapid review.
        Disabil Health J Jan. 2021; 14: 101014https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2020.101014
        • National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools
        Rapid review: effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in long-term care residents.
        2021 (Available at)
        • Smale J.
        • Valkanas H.
        • Moreno J.
        • Schubert-Mackey K.
        Mitigating unintended harms of COVID-19 public health measures among low income populations rapid review.
        (Available at)
        • Vist G.E.
        • Arentz-Hansen E.H.
        • Vedøy T.F.
        • Spilker R.S.
        • Hafstad E.V.
        • Giske L.
        Incidence and severe outcomes from COVID-19 among immigrant and minority ethnic groups and among groups of different socio-economic status 2021.
        Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo2021 (Available at)
        • Meyer T.
        • Tilly C.
        Reporting of patients' characteristics in rehabilitation trials: an analysis of publications of RCTs in major clinical rehabilitation journals.
        Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2020; 56: 829-835https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06710-6
        • Tugwell P.
        • Petticrew M.
        • Kristjansson E.
        • Welch V.
        • Ueffing E.
        • Waters E.
        • et al.
        Assessing equity in systematic reviews: realising the recommendations of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health.
        BMJ. 2010; 341: c4739https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4739
        • Prady S.L.
        • Uphoff E.P.
        • Power M.
        • Golder S.
        Development and validation of a search filter to identify equity-focused studies: reducing the number needed to screen.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018; 18: 106https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0567-x
        • Hosking J.
        • Macmillan A.
        • Jones R.
        • Ameratunga S.
        • Woodward A.
        Searching for health equity: validation of a search filter for ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in transport.
        Syst Rev. 2019; 8: 94https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1009-5
        • Moerman C.J.
        • Deurenberg R.
        • Haafkens J.A.
        Locating sex-specific evidence on clinical questions in MEDLINE: a search filter for use on OvidSP.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009; 9: 25https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-25
      19. EPOC LMIC filters 2020 (v.4).
        (Available at)
        https://epoc.cochrane.org/lmic-filters
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
        • Mbuagbaw L.
        • Aves T.
        • Shea B.
        • Jull J.
        • Welch V.
        • Taljaard M.
        • et al.
        Considerations and guidance in designing equity-relevant clinical trials.
        Int J Equity Health. 2017; 16: 93https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0591-1
        • Liberati A.
        • Altman D.G.
        • Tetzlaff J.
        • Mulrow C.
        • Gøtzsche P.C.
        • Ioannidis J.P.
        • et al.
        The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.
        Plos Med. 2009; 6: e1000100https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
        • Kneale D.
        • Thomas J.
        • Harris K.
        Developing and optimising the use of logic models in systematic reviews: exploring practice and good practice in the use of programme theory in reviews.
        PLoS One. 2015; 10: e0142187https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142187
        • Mackinnon A.
        • Amott N.
        • McGarvey C.
        Mapping change: using a theory of change to guide planning and evaluation.
        2006 (Available at)
        http://www.grantcraft.org/index.cfm
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
        • White H.
        Theory-based systematic reviews.
        J Development Effectiveness. 2018; 10: 17-38https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2018.1439078
        • Sun X.
        • Briel M.
        • Walter S.D.
        • Guyatt G.H.
        Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses.
        BMJ. 2010; 340: c117https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c117
      20. Higgins J.P.T. Thomas J. Chandler J. Cumpston M. Li T. Page M.J. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Cochrane, London, England2021 (Available at)
        www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
        Version: version 6.2
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
        (updated February 2021)
        • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
        Institute of gender and health online training modules. Integrating sex and gender in health research.
        (Available at)
        http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/49347.html
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
        • Mackieson P.
        • Shlonsky A.
        • Connolly M.
        Increasing rigor and reducing bias in qualitative research: a document analysis of parliamentary debates using applied thematic analysis.
        Qual Social Work. 2018; 18: 965-980https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325018786996
        • Alejandro A.
        Reflexive discourse analysis: a methodology for the practice of reflexivity.
        Eur J Int Relations. 2020; 27: 150-174https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066120969789
        • Noyes J.
        • Booth A.
        • Cargo M.
        • Flemming K.
        • Harden A.
        • Harris J.
        • et al.
        Qualitative evidence.
        Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. 2019. Wiley Online Books, Hoboken, NJ2019: 525-545
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Kunz R.
        • Vist G.E.
        • Falck-Ytter Y.
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • GRADE Working Group
        What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?.
        BMJ. 2008; 336: 995-998https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39490.551019
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Vist G.E.
        • Kunz R.
        • Falck-Ytter Y.
        • Alonso-Coello P.
        • et al.
        • GRADE Working Group
        GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.
        BMJ. 2008; 336: 924-926https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347
        • Guyatt G.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Akl E.A.
        • Kunz R.
        • Vist G.
        • Brozek J.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 383-394https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026
        • Welch V.A.
        • Akl E.A.
        • Pottie K.
        • Ansari M.T.
        • Briel M.
        • Christensen R.
        • et al.
        GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2017; 90: 76-83https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015
        • Panic N.
        • Leoncini E.
        • de Belvis G.
        • Ricciardi W.
        • Boccia S.
        Evaluation of the endorsement of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses.
        PLoS One. 2013; 8: e83138https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083138
        • Turner L.
        • Shamseer L.
        • Altman D.G.
        • Weeks L.
        • Peters J.
        • Kober T.
        • et al.
        Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 11: MR000030https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000030.pub2
        • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
        Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals, updated December 2014.
        (Available at)
        www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf
        Date accessed: January 24, 2022
        • Serrant-Green L.
        The sound of ‘silence’: a framework for researching sensitive issues or marginalised perspectives in health.
        J Res Nurs. 2010; 16: 347-360https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987110387741
        • Innvaer S.
        • Vist G.
        • Trommald M.
        • Oxman A.
        Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review.
        J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002; 7: 239-244https://doi.org/10.1258/135581902320432778
        • Orton L.
        • Lloyd-Williams F.
        • Taylor-Robinson D.
        • O'Flaherty M.
        • Capewell S.
        The use of research evidence in public health decision making processes: systematic review.
        PLoS One. 2011; 6: e21704https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021704
        • Kok M.O.
        • Gyapong J.O.
        • Wolffers I.
        • Ofori-Adjei D.
        • Ruitenberg J.
        Which health research gets used and why? An empirical analysis of 30 cases.
        Health Res Policy Syst. 2016; 14: 36https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0107-2
        • Frank L.
        • Morton S.C.
        • Guise J.M.
        • Jull J.
        • Concannon T.W.
        • Tugwell P.
        • et al.
        • Multi Stakeholder Engagement (MuSE) Consortium
        Engaging patients and other non-researchers in health research: defining research engagement.
        J Gen Intern Med. 2020; 35: 307-314https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05436-2
        • Murphy E.
        • Tierney E.
        • Shé É N.í.
        • Killilea M.
        • Donaghey C.
        • Daly A.
        • et al.
        COVID-19: public and patient involvement, now more than ever.
        HRB open Res. 2020; 3: 35https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13067.1
        • Tricco A.C.
        • Garritty C.M.
        • Boulos L.
        • Lockwood C.
        • Wilson M.
        • McGowan J.
        • et al.
        Rapid review methods more challenging during COVID-19: commentary with a focus on 8 knowledge synthesis steps.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2020; 126: 177-183https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.029
        • Khatter A.
        • Naughton M.
        • Dambha-Miller H.
        • Redmond P.
        Is rapid scientific publication also high quality? Bibliometric analysis of highly disseminated COVID-19 research papers.
        Learn Publ, London, United Kingdom2021
        • Lavis J.N.
        Research, public policymaking, and knowledge-translation processes: Canadian efforts to build bridges.
        J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006; 26: 37-45https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.49
        • Straus S.E.
        • Tetroe J.
        • Graham I.
        Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice.
        Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell - BMJ Books, Oxford, United Kingdom2009
        • Welch V.A.
        • Petticrew M.
        • O’Neill J.
        • Waters E.
        • Armstrong R.
        • Bhutta Z.A.
        • et al.
        Health equity: evidence synthesis and knowledge translation methods.
        Syst Rev. 2013; 2: 43https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-43
        • Rycroft-Malone J.
        • Bucknall T.
        Models and frameworks for implementing evidence-based practice: linking evidence to action.
        Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell - Sigma Theta Tau International, Oxford, United Kingdom2010
        • Douglas M.D.
        • Josiah Willock R.
        • Respress E.
        • Rollins L.
        • Tabor D.
        • Heiman H.J.
        • et al.
        Applying a health equity lens to evaluate and inform policy.
        Ethn Dis. 2019; 29: 329-342https://doi.org/10.18865/ed.29.S2.329
        • Eslava-Schmalbach J.
        • Garzón-Orjuela N.
        • Elias V.
        • Reveiz L.
        • Tran N.
        • Langlois E.V.
        Conceptual framework of equity-focused implementation research for health programs (EquIR).
        Int J Equity Health. 2019; 18: 80https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-019-0984-4
        • Tyler I.
        • Amare H.
        • Hyndman B.
        • Manson H.
        Ontario agency for health protection and promotion (Public Health Ontario, 2014 Health Ontario). Health equity assessment: facilitators and barriers to application of health equity tools.
        2014
        • Pauly B.M.
        • Shahram S.Z.
        • Dang P.T.H.
        • Marcellus L.
        • MacDonald M.
        Health equity talk: understandings of health equity among health leaders.
        AIMS Public Health. 2017; 4: 490-512https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2017.5.490
        • Oickle D.
        Do tools catalyze action on health equity?.
        (Available at)
        • Gagliardi A.R.
        • Berta W.
        • Kothari A.
        • Boyko J.
        • Urquhart R.
        Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review.
        Implement Sci. 2016; 11: 38https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0399-1
        • Ruger J.P.
        Ethics and governance of global health inequalities.
        J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006; 60: 998-1003https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2005.041947
        • WHO
        Making fair choices on the path to universal health coverage: final report of the WHO consultative group on equity and universal health coverage.
        World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland2014
        • Cellier M.S.
        The Place and Importance of Patients in Deliberative Processes..
        Frontiers in medical technology. 2021; 3: 794695https://doi.org/10.3389/fmedt.2021.794695