Exploring the literature on racism and health practitioner regulation: a scoping review protocol

Author:

Chiu PatrickORCID,Louie-Poon Samantha,Leslie KathleenORCID,Kung Janice Y

Abstract

IntroductionRacism in healthcare leads to significant harm to healthcare professionals and the clients, families and communities they serve. Increasingly, health practitioner regulators—responsible for protecting the public and ensuring practitioner competence—are recognising the importance of reforming policies and practices to contribute to antiracist regulatory approaches. Examples of this work include developing specific standards of practice related to antiracism and antidiscrimination, supporting education and training, re-evaluating discriminatory licensure policies for internationally educated professionals and reforming internal governance structures to address unconscious bias. An understanding of the current state of literature can help identify knowledge gaps and inform the development of research agendas that can build the evidence base required to improve health practitioner regulators’ approaches to addressing racism.The objective of this scoping review is to explore the nature, extent and range of literature focused on racism and health practitioner regulation and identify gaps in the literature.Methods and analysisThe review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews. Database searches will include OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection. The review will include papers that discuss how health practitioner regulation can contribute to and perpetuate interpersonal and institutional racism, and how regulatory policies and practices can help address racism. We will also search for grey literature using the websites of leading regulatory organisations. Data will be analysed using descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis. Findings will be presented using evidence tables and a narrative summary. Reporting will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not applicable to this review protocol. Findings will be disseminated through presentations, meetings with health practitioner regulators and a publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Publisher

BMJ

Reference30 articles.

1. Racism, xenophobia, and discrimination: mapping pathways to health outcomes

2. Racism and Health: Evidence and Needed Research

3. Racism in Healthcare: a scoping review;Hamed;BMC Public Health,2022

4. Professional Standards Authority . Safer care for all: solutions from professional regulation and beyond. 2022. Available: https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/docs/default-source/publications/thought-paper/safer-care-for-all-solutions-from-professional-regulation-and-beyond.pdf?sfvrsn=9364b20_7 [Accessed 29 Nov 2023].

5. Design, delivery and effectiveness of health practitioner regulation systems: an integrative review;Leslie;Hum Resour Health,2023

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3