| Literature DB >> 35879014 |
Stephana Julia Moss1, Diane L Lorenzetti2, Emily A FitzGerald1, Stacie Smith3, Micaela Harley4, Perri R Tutelman5,6, Kathryn Birnie7, Sara J Mizen1, Melanie C Anglin8, Henry T Stelfox8, Kirsten M Fiest8, Jeanna Parsons Leigh9.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Children and youth are often more vulnerable than adults to emotional impacts of trauma. Wide-ranging negative effects (eg, social isolation, lack of physical activity) of the COVID-19 pandemic on children and youth are well established. This scoping review will identify, describe and categorise strategies taken to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on children, youth and their families. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review following the Arksey-O'Malley five-stage scoping review method and the Scoping Review Methods Manual by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Well-being will be operationalised according to pre-established domains (health and nutrition, connectedness, safety and support, learning and competence, and agency and resilience). Articles in all languages for this review will be identified in CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, ERIC, Education Research Complete, MEDLINE and APA PsycINFO. The search strategy will be restricted to articles published on or after 1 December 2019. We will include primary empirical and non-empirical methodologies, excluding protocols, reports, opinions and editorials, to identify new data for a broad range of strategies to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on child and youth well-being. Two reviewers will calibrate screening criteria and the data abstraction form and will independently screen records and abstract data. Data synthesis will be performed according to the convergent integrated approach described by the Joanna Briggs Institute. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not applicable as this review will be conducted on published data. Findings of this study will be disseminated at national and international conferences and will inform our pan-Canadian multidisciplinary team of researchers, public, health professionals and knowledge users to codesign and pilot test a digital psychoeducational health tool-an interactive, web-based tool to help Canadian youth and their families address poor mental well-being resulting from and persisting beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; child & adolescent psychiatry; community child health; mental health
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35879014 PMCID: PMC9327437 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062413
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 3.006
Inclusion and exclusion criteria for a scoping review investigating strategies to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on child and youth well-being
| Inclusion | Exclusion |
| Any observational or interventional primary research study, including focus groups and qualitative inquiries. | The study is a study protocol, review, commentary, editorial, opinion, case study and case report, or report from an expert advisory group. |
| The study’s population includes children or youth aged ≤18 years. | The study’s population does not include children or youth aged ≤18 years. |
| The study reports on a strategy (ie, intervention) to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. | The study does not report on a strategy (ie, intervention) to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. |
| The study outcome(s) are any well-being outcome that will be operationalised according to pre-established domains (health and nutrition, connectedness, safety and support, learning and competence, and agency and resilience). | The study outcome(s) are not any well-being outcome that will be operationalised according to pre-established domains (health and nutrition, connectedness, safety and support, learning and competence, and agency and resilience). |
| The study was started on or after 1 December 2019. | The study was started before 1 December 2019. |
| The study presents unique data which have not been previously published, or is the most recent and comprehensive analysis of the data. | The study which includes duplicate data from an earlier published study. |
Screening questions to identify literature for inclusion in a scoping review investigating strategies to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on child and youth well-being
| Screening domain and question | Characteristics for assessment | ||
| Yes—include | No—exclude | Unclear—include | |
|
| |||
| Yes: The study employs an observational or interventional primary research design, including focus groups and qualitative inquiries. | No: The study is a protocol, review, commentary, editorial, opinion, case study, case report, thesis, preprint or a report from an expert advisory group. | Unclear: It is unclear if the study employs an observational or interventional primary research design, including focus groups and qualitative inquiries. | |
| Yes: The study is a published study. | No: The study is not a published study. | Unclear: It is unclear if the study is a published study. | |
| Yes: The study population describes children or youth aged 18 years or under. | No: The population of interest does not include children or youth aged 18 years or under. | Unclear: It is unclear if the population of interest includes children or youth aged 18 years or under. | |
| Yes: The exposure of interest includes any strategy implemented to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on children or youth. | No: The exposure of interest does not include any strategy implemented to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on children or youth. | Unclear: It is unclear if the exposure of interest includes any strategy implemented to mitigate potentially deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on children or youth. | |
| Yes: One or more of the outcomes in the study are any well-being outcomes operationalised according to pre-established domains (health and nutrition, connectedness, safety and support, learning and competence, and agency and resilience). | No: There is no outcome in the study related to any of well-being outcomes operationalised according to pre-established domains (health and nutrition, connectedness, safety and support, learning and competence, and agency and resilience). | Unclear: It is unclear from the title and abstract if the outcome of interest is related to any of well-being outcomes operationalised according to pre-established domains (health and nutrition, connectedness, safety and support, learning and competence, and agency and resilience). | |
Full article screening questions include all screening domains and questions from title and abstract screening and two additional domains.
Data to be abstracted from eligible studies included in the review*
| Data domain | Data categories |
| Author names; study title; publication type; publication date; journal, volume, issue and page numbers of publication; place of publication (ie, first author’s institutional email address); digital object identifier | |
| Study type or design; timeframe of study; location of study (ie, country); region of study (localised when reported) | |
| Definition and size (ie, n) of the source population(s) at risk; relevant demographic information (eg, age, sex, gender, ethnicity, grade in school, type of school, relationship to guardian if not parent) | |
| Strategy type, duration (if applicable), location (ie, geographical); steps or guiding principles to conduct the strategy (eg, elements or a stepwise protocol); derivation of the strategy from empirical evidence (ie, if derived from observation and experiment, or published theory); minimum expertise to conduct the strategy (ie, whether additional personnel are required (eg, social worker, psychiatrist)); limitations to the strategy (eg, requirement of stable WiFi connection or personal device); reproducibility of the strategy (ie, operationalised, evidenced by use in multiple settings); feasibility of the strategy to other contexts (ie, generalisable, considering if internal validity should precede external validity) | |
| Child, youth or parent/guardian COVID-19 status; assessment tool(s); timepoint of assessment(s); assessment estimate and measure of variance (eg, standard decision, IQR); statistical significance; authors’ conclusions and recommendations; themes and subthemes including exemplary quotations from studies reporting qualitative findings |
*Data will be categorised according to the ‘Inform, Activate, Collaborate Framework’ developed by our team.
Anticipated deliverables from the scoping review
| Deliverables | Audience | Methods |
| Framework of potential strategies according to the domain of well-being and level of engagement required | Youth, family members, healthcare providers, researchers, advocacy councils and policy makers | Publish in relevant journals; disseminate at relevant academic meetings; presentation at grand rounds. |
| A bibliography of articles that describe how to conduct strategies to mitigate impact | Youth, family members, healthcare providers, researchers, advocacy councils, policy makers and funders | Prepare a summary report outlining possible approaches to mitigate potential impacts that will include the primary articles, to be made available as a PowerPoint slide deck; non-traditional strategies to disseminate our results (eg, social media, blogs). |
| An in-depth synthesis and comparison of results and insights on strategies, including categorisation of methods used to assess each strategy, to reveal what research is available for each strategy | Youth, family members, healthcare providers, researchers, youth advocacy councils and policy makers | Inform a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design that involves three intersecting phases of work anchored conceptually to the five domains of youth well-being. We have partnered with the O’Brien Institute for Public Health, The Sandbox Project, KT Canada, Children’s Healthcare Canada, Young Canadians Roundtable on Health, Solutions for Kids in Pain, 19 to Zero, and Maritime and Alberta SPOR Support Units for implementation. |