Addressing the environmental, community and health impacts of resource development: Challenges across scales, sectors and sites

Work that addresses the cumulative impacts of resource extraction on environment, community, and health is necessarily large in scope. This paper presents experiences from initiating research at this intersection and explores implications for the ambitious, integrative agenda of planetary health. The purpose is to outline origins, design features, and preliminary insights from our intersectoral and international project, based in Canada and titled the “Environment, Community, Health Observatory” (ECHO) Network. With a clear emphasis on rural, remote, and Indigenous communities, environments, and health, the ECHO Network is designed to answer the question: How can an Environment, Community, Health Observatory Network support the integrative tools and processes required to improve understanding and response to the cumulative health impacts of resource development? The Network is informed by four regional cases across Canada where we employ a framework and an approach grounded in observation, “taking notice for action”, and collective learning. Sharing insights from the foundational phase of this five-year project, we reflect on the hidden and obvious challenges of working across scales, sectors, and sites, and the overlap of generative and uncomfortable entanglements associated with health and resource development. Yet, although intersectoral work addressing the cumulative impacts of resource extraction presents uncertainty and unresolved tensions, ultimately we argue that it is worth staying with the trouble

Addressing the environmental, community and health impacts of resource development: Challenges across scales, sectors and sites

Work that addresses the cumulative impacts of resource extraction on environment, community, and health is necessarily large in scope. This paper presents experiences from initiating research at this intersection and explores implications for the ambitious, integrative agenda of planetary health. The purpose is to outline origins, design features, and preliminary insights from our intersectoral and international project, based in Canada and titled the “Environment, Community, Health Observatory” (ECHO) Network. With a clear emphasis on rural, remote, and Indigenous communities, environments, and health, the ECHO Network is designed to answer the question: How can an Environment, Community, Health Observatory Network support the integrative tools and processes required to improve understanding and response to the cumulative health impacts of resource development? The Network is informed by four regional cases across Canada where we employ a framework and an approach grounded in observation, “taking notice for action”, and collective learning. Sharing insights from the foundational phase of this five-year project, we reflect on the hidden and obvious challenges of working across scales, sectors, and sites, and the overlap of generative and uncomfortable entanglements associated with health and resource development. Yet, although intersectoral work addressing the cumulative impacts of resource extraction presents uncertainty and unresolved tensions, ultimately we argue that it is worth staying with the trouble

Evaluating Extra-organizational Communities of Practice

A community of practice (CoP) is a group of people who work together on an ongoing basis and share knowledge and expertise about common practices, problems, or topics. CoPs are increasingly being acknowledged as critical components in sectors such as health care and business management. Although the potential for CoPs to promote learning, knowledge mobilization, and other benefits is recognized, limited research exists on evaluating CoPs and little agreement is evident on approaches to evaluating CoPs. In particular, there is a scarcity of research and evaluation on extra-organizational CoPs. This dissertation starts with a scoping review of evaluation frameworks for CoPs, describing 16 evaluation frameworks and how they were applied or tested. These frameworks were not fully applicable to extra-organizational CoPs; hence, the impetus for the second study, which was to develop an evaluation framework adapted to this type of CoP. The proposed framework guides evaluators to systematically consider the types of value generated by extra-organizational CoPs and the level of analysis at which value occurs. The dissertation proceeds to assess the applicability of the proposed evaluation framework using qualitative interviews with an extra-organizational community of practice (CoPEH-Canada). The findings show that the evaluation framework proved to be comprehensive as a tool for collecting and analyzing data and framing results. The findings from the application of the framework were used to refine the framework and to better understand the potential value generated by extra-organizational CoPs. This dissertation has practical applications for evaluators, CoP members and other stakeholders; it makes a methodological contribution through the development and refinement of an evaluation framework; and it makes a theoretical contribution by expanding knowledge of extra-organizational CoPs and how they could be evaluated.Ph.D

Stroke Rehabilitation and Patients with Multimorbidity: A Scoping Review Protocol

Stroke care presents unique challenges for clinicians, as most strokes occur in the context of other medical diagnoses. An assessment of capacity for implementing “best practice” stroke care found clinicians reporting a strong need for training specific to patient/system complexity and multimorbidity. With mounting patient complexity, there is pressure to implement new models of healthcare delivery for both quality and financial sustainability. Policy makers and administrators are turning to clinical practice guidelines to support decision-making and resource allocation. Stroke rehabilitation programs across Canada are being transformed to better align with the Canadian Stroke Strategy's Stroke Best Practice Recommendations. The recommendations provide a framework to facilitate the adoption of evidence-based best practices in stroke across the continuum of care. However, given the increasing and emerging complexity of patients with stroke in terms of multimorbidity, the evidence supporting clinical practice guidelines may not align with the current patient population. To evaluate this, electronic databases and gray literature will be searched, including published or unpublished studies of quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods research designs. Team members will screen the literature and abstract the data. Results will present a numerical account of the amount, type, and distribution of the studies included and a thematic analysis and concept map of the results. This review represents the first attempt to map the available literature on stroke rehabilitation and multimorbidity, and identify gaps in the existing research. The results will be relevant for knowledge users concerned with stroke rehabilitation by expanding the understanding of the current evidence

Public health guide to field developments linking ecosystems, environments and health in the Anthropocene

The impacts of global environmental change have precipitated numerous approaches that connect the health of ecosystems, non-human organisms and humans. However, the proliferation of approaches can lead to confusion due to overlaps in terminology, ideas and foci. Recognising the need for clarity, this paper provides a guide to seven field developments in environmental public health research and practice: occupational and environmental health, political ecology of health, environmental justice, ecohealth, One Health, ecological public health, and planetary health. Field developments are defined in terms of their uniqueness from one another, are historically situated, and core texts or journals are highlighted. The paper ends by discussing some of the intersecting features across field developments, and considers opportunities created through such convergence. This field guide will be useful for those seeking to build a next generation of integrative research, policy, education and action that is equipped to respond to current health and sustainability challenges

Stroke rehabilitation evidence and comorbidity: a systematic scoping review of randomized controlled trials

<p><b>Background</b>: Most strokes occur in the context of other medical diagnoses. Currently, stroke rehabilitation evidence reviews have not synthesized or presented evidence with a focus on comorbidities and correspondingly may not align with current patient population. The purpose of this review was to determine the extent and nature of randomized controlled trial stroke rehabilitation evidence that included patients with multimorbidity.</p> <p><b>Methods</b>: A systematic scoping review was conducted. Electronic databases were searched using a combination of terms related to “stroke” and “rehabilitation.” Selection criteria captured inpatient rehabilitation studies. Methods were modified to account for the amount of literature, classified by study design, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were abstracted.</p> <p><b>Results</b>: The database search yielded 10771 unique articles. Screening resulted in 428 included RCTs. Three studies explicitly included patients with a comorbid condition. Fifteen percent of articles did not specify additional conditions that were excluded. Impaired cognition was the most commonly excluded condition. Approximately 37% of articles excluded patients who had experienced a previous stroke. Twenty-four percent excluded patients one or more Charlson Index condition, and 83% excluded patients with at least one other medical condition.</p> <p><b>Conclusions</b>: This review represents a first attempt to map literature on stroke rehabilitation related to co/multimorbidity and identify gaps in existing research. Existing evidence on stroke rehabilitation often excluded individuals with comorbidities. This is problematic as the evidence that is used to generate clinical guidelines may not match the patient typically seen in practice. The use of alternate research methods are therefore needed for studying the care of individuals with stroke and multimorbidity.</p