ArticleBMJ open2024
Development and implementation determinants of competency frameworks for mental health clinicians and service providers working with youth: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite high prevalence, access to mental healthcare for Canadian youth is limited, with less than 20% receiving adequate treatment. Marginalised and at-risk youth face particular challenges, including cultural misunderstandings, long wait times and negative care experiences. A competency framework for mental health clinicians working with youth can be a tool to increase the capacity of the health workforce to deliver culturally responsive care. This scoping review aims to comprehensively summarise the existing literature on competency frameworks for mental health clinicians and youth service providers, assessing how these frameworks align with culturally responsive care and examining their development, evaluation and implementation methods. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This review protocol is guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines and registered with the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EY7NF). The search strategy, developed with an Information Specialist, comprises a three-step process: preliminary searches in two databases, expansion of the search across Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CENTRAL and dissertations and theses databases and examination of reference lists and hand-searching for additional sources. The search strategy was reviewed using the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies checklist. Eligible English language articles will be selected through title and abstract screening (level 1) and full-text review (level 2). The search dates are 18 July and 21 August 2023, as well as 19 January 2024. Data from eligible articles will be extracted in duplicate and independently using a data extraction form. The data will then be summarised descriptively and qualitatively using content analysis mapped to the four evidence-based conceptual frameworks and presented in a table. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As the scoping review involves gathering and describing existing literature, it is exempt from ethical approval requirements. The findings of this scoping review will be presented at relevant local and international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. The findings will also be disseminated and shared with professional organisations to enhance healthcare workforce capacity and drive systemic change. Furthermore, the findings will be used to inform doctoral work and future mental health and health education research related to underserved youth.
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.