Key findings according to a conceptual framework of implementation fidelity.

<p>Profession (Nx = nurse, Sx = surgeon, Ax = anesthetist), Province (two-letter identifier), Hospital type (S = small, L = large, T = teaching), Time using the surgical checklist (short = ≤12 months, long = 13+ months).</p><p>Key findings according to a conceptual framework of implementation fidelity.</p

Participant characteristics by profession, type of hospital and time using the surgical checklist.

<p>Participant characteristics by profession, type of hospital and time using the surgical checklist.</p

Patient characteristics and outcomes for ethnic minorities.

<p><b>Notes:</b> *major publication, ‡non-Indigenous and Caucasian are the reference groups unless it was a study conducted in another region (e.g., Chinese considered the reference group in China), Indigenous includes Aboriginals, First Nations, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Maori, Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders, and Torres Strait Islanders, Blacks include African American, African, and Afro-Caribbean, † we obtained unpublished data from the authors of this study in the form of a poster presentation, Π we obtained unpublished data for the state of California from the authors.</p><p><b>Abbreviations:</b> A Asian, A/PI Asian/Pacific Islander, ALL acute lymphoblastic leukemia, B Black, C Caucasian, CHD coronary heart disease, CHF congestive heart failure, CI confidence interval, CLD chronic lung disease, COPD chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CP cerebral palsy, DM diabetes mellitus, DS down syndrome, F foreigners, unspecified,F/W Fall/Winter, H Hispanic, htn hypertension, I Indigenous, ICU intensive care unit, ID Indian descent, MD muscular dystrophy, MO morbid obesity, ND neurological disease, NI non-Indigenous, NMO non-morbid obesity, NRF non-respiratory failure, RAD reactive airway disease, RF respiratory failure, SD standard deviation, SLE systemic lupus erthematosus, S/S Spring/Summer, U unspecified.</p

Study flow.

<p>This is the flow of citations and articles that were screened for the systematic review.</p

Meta-analysis of ICU admissions among ethnic minorities versus non-ethnic minorities.

<p>Favours ethnic minority means that ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions due to H1N1 compared to non-ethnic minorities. Favours non-ethnic minorities means that non-ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of ICU admissions due to H1N1 compared to ethnic minorities.</p

Meta-analysis of hospitalizations among ethnic minorities versus non-ethnic minorities in North America.

<p>Favours ethnic minority means that ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of H1N1 hospitalizations compared to non-ethnic minorities. Favours non-ethnic minorities means that non-ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of H1N1 hospitalizations compared to ethnic minorities.</p

Patient characteristics and outcomes for low-income and lower-middle-income economies.

<p><b>Abbreviations:</b> CHD coronary heart disease, CHF congestive heart failure, CLD chronic lung disease, COPD chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, DM diabetes mellitus, htn hypertension, ID Indian descent, NR not reported, SD standard deviation.</p

Meta-analysis of mortality among hospitalized ethnic minorities versus hospitalized non-ethnic minorities.

<p>Favours ethnic minority means that ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of deaths due to H1N1 among hospitalized patients compared to non-ethnic minorities. Favours non-ethnic minorities means that non-ethnic minorities experienced a lower proportion of deaths due to H1N1 among hospitalized patients compared to ethnic minorities.</p

Methodological quality.

<p><b>Note:</b> Please see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0039437#pone.0039437.s002" target="_blank">Appendix S2</a> for an explanation of each methodological quality component. Briefly, each item was appraised as follows:</p><p>1) Representativeness: a) truly representative, b) somewhat representative, c) selected group of users, d) no description of the derivation of the cohort.</p><p>2) Selection: a) drawn from the same community as exposed cohort, b) drawn from a different source, c) no description.</p><p>3) Ascertainment: a) secure record, b) structured interview, c) written self report, d) no description.</p><p>4) Demonstration: a) yes, b) no.</p><p>5) Comparability: a) study controls for age or gender, b) study controls for any additional factor, c) no control.</p><p>6) Assessment: a) independent blind assessment, b) record linkage, c) self report, d) no description.</p><p>7) Follow-up: a) yes, b) no.</p><p>8) Adequacy: a) complete follow up, b) subjects lost to follow up unlikely to introduce bias, c) large loss to follow-up, d) no statement.</p

Primary and secondary outcomes of the toolkit intervention.

a<p>Adjusting for age, sex, diabetes duration, previous cardiovascular disease, and practice diabetes patient volume.</p>b<p>Among patients aged ≥65 years who were not already receiving the medication at baseline.</p><p>ACEI, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; CAD, coronary artery disease; ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient; OR, odds ratio.</p