ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2022
Professional regulation, profession-state relations and the pandemic response: Australia, Canada, and the UK compared.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Design, delivery and effectiveness of health practitioner regulation systems: an integrative review.Human resources for health · 2023Pooled it
- The Iran Healthcare Professionals' Charter of Rights.Archives of Iranian medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Canadian healthcare workforce: a rapid evidence synthesis of key considerations, lessons learned, and promising practices to address the healthcare workforce crisis.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Institutional inconsistencies and professionals' hidden institutional work in Russian pandemic-affected healthcare: The material dimension.Health (London, England : 1997) · 2025Article
- Article
- Medical assistance in dying in Canada: A review of regulatory practice standards and guidance documents for physicians.Palliative care and social practice · 2025Article
- Health human resources planning in Canada-Part II: Its importance for pharmacy in Canada.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC · 2024Article
- Development and Implementation of Workshops to Optimize the Delivery of Vaccination Services in Community Pharmacies: Thinking beyond COVID-19.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Regulating During Crisis: A Qualitative Comparative Case Study of Nursing Regulatory Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of nursing regulation · 2023Article
- Examining the Global Nursing Regulatory Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of nursing regulation · 2023Article
- Regulating in the public interest: Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic.Healthcare management forum · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic provoked a surge in demand for health services. To help meet this demand, governments and health profession regulators implemented regulatory policy change to enhance professional availability and flexibility. Some nations may have been better positioned to make such changes due to their systems of healthcare profession regulation. More specifically, countries like Australia and the United Kingdom with their national regulatory structures could be more adaptable than Canada with its provincial system of regulation. To determine if this is the case, and guided by Abbott's (1988, 2005) ecological approach, we conducted a policy analysis. We find few differences in regulatory policy changes in terms of what was done, with the exception of scope of practice changes, which were implemented in Canadian provinces, but were not necessary in Australia and the United Kingdom. Instead, in the latter two countries practitioners were asked to bear responsibility for their own scopes. Additional content analysis of medical journals explored what professionals thought about policy responses, finding that Australian professionals were more positive than others. Moreover, government responses were regarded more favourably when they were perceived to be collaborative. Although there is little evidence that one regulatory system is better than another in facilitating crisis responses, regulatory structures do shape the nature of regulatory policy change.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.