Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
BMJ Open. 2024 Jul 13;14(7):e084084. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084084.
Racism 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.
The 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 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.
医疗保健中的种族主义会对医疗保健专业人员以及他们所服务的客户、家庭和社区造成重大伤害。越来越多的医疗从业者监管机构——负责保护公众并确保从业者的能力——认识到改革政策和实践以促进反种族主义监管方法的重要性。这项工作的例子包括制定与反种族主义和反歧视相关的具体实践标准、支持教育和培训、重新评估针对国际教育专业人员的歧视性许可政策以及改革内部治理结构以解决无意识偏见。了解当前文献的状况有助于确定知识差距，并为制定研究议程提供信息，这些议程可以为改善医疗从业者监管机构解决种族主义问题的方法提供所需的证据基础。本研究的目的是探索关注种族主义和医疗从业者监管的文献的性质、范围和范围，并确定文献中的空白。
本综述将按照 Joanna Briggs 研究所的范围综述指南进行。数据库搜索将包括 OVID MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、Scopus 和 Web of Science Core Collection。本综述将包括讨论医疗从业者监管如何有助于和延续人际和机构种族主义以及监管政策和实践如何有助于解决种族主义的论文。我们还将使用领先监管组织的网站搜索灰色文献。数据将使用描述性统计和常规内容分析进行分析。结果将使用证据表和叙述性摘要呈现。报告将遵循系统评价和元分析扩展的首选报告项目。
本综述方案不需要伦理批准。研究结果将通过演讲、与医疗从业者监管机构的会议以及在同行评议期刊上发表来传播。
