Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorArchibald, Daryll
dc.contributor.authorPatterson, Rebecca
dc.contributor.authorHaraldsdottir, Erna
dc.contributor.authorHazelwood, Mark
dc.contributor.authorFife, Shirley
dc.contributor.authorMurray, Scott A.
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-29T21:37:19Z
dc.date.available2018-06-29T21:37:19Z
dc.date.issued2016-07-14
dc.identifierER4881
dc.identifier.citationArchibald, D., Patterson, R., Haraldsdottir, E., Hazelwood, M., Fife, S. & Murray, S. (2016) Mapping the progress and impacts of public health approaches to palliative care: a scoping review protocol, BMJ Open, vol. 6, , pp. e012058,
dc.identifier.issn2044-6055
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012058
dc.identifier.urihttps://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/4881
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Public health palliative care is a term that can be used to encompass a variety of approaches that involve working with communities to improve people's experience of death, dying and bereavement. Recently, public health palliative care approaches have gained recognition and momentum within UK health policy and palliative care services. There is general consensus that public health palliative care approaches can complement and go beyond the scope of formal service models of palliative care. However, there is no clarity about how these approaches can be undertaken in practice or how evidence can be gathered relating to their effectiveness. Here we outline a scoping review protocol that will systematically map and categorise the variety of activities and programmes that could be classified under the umbrella term 'public health palliative care' and highlight the impact of these activities where measured. Methods and analysis: This review will be guided by Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology and incorporate insights from more recent innovations in scoping review methodology. Sensitive searches of 9 electronic databases from 1999 to 2016 will be supplemented by grey literature searches. Eligible studies will be screened independently by two reviewers using a data charting tool developed for this scoping review. Ethics and dissemination: This scoping review will undertake a secondary analysis of data already collected and does not require ethical approval. The results will facilitate better understanding of the practical application of public health approaches to palliative care, the impacts these activities can have and how to build the evidence base for this work in future. The results will be disseminated through traditional academic routes such as conferences and journals and also policy and third sector seminars.
dc.format.extente012058
dc.relation.ispartofBMJ Open
dc.titleMapping the progress and impacts of public health approaches to palliative care: a scoping review protocol
dc.typearticle
dcterms.accessRightspublic
dc.description.facultysch_nur
dc.description.referencetext1. Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. Policies and strategies to promote social equity in health. Copenhagen: World Health Organization, 1992. http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2008/06/25104032/4 2. Kellehear A. Health-promoting palliative care. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1999. 3. WHO. The Ottawa Charter for health promotion. Ottawa, ON, Canada: WHO/Canadian Public Health Association/Health Canada, 1986. 4. Sallnow L, Richardson H, Murray SA, et al. The impact of a new public health approach to end-of-life care: a systematic review. Palliat Med 2016;30:200-11. 5. Sallnow L, Paul S. Understanding community engagement in end-oflife care: developing conceptual clarity. Crit Publ Health 2014;25:231-8. 6. Karapliagou A, Kelleahear A. The forgotten people in British public health: a national neglect of the dying, bereaved and caregivers. BMJ Support Palliat Care 2015;6:153-9. 7. Haraldsdottir E, Clark P, Murray SM. Health promoting palliative care arrives in Scotland European. J Palliat Care 2010;17:130-2. 8. Rosenberg JP, Yates PM. Health promotion in palliative care: the case for conceptual congruence. Crit Publ Health 2010;20:201-10. 9. The Joanna Briggs Institute. Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual: 2015 edition/supplement. Adelaide: The Joanna Briggs Institute, 2015. 10. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005;8:19-32. 11. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 2010;5:1-9. 12. Kellehear A. Compassionate cities: public health and end-of-life care. London: Routledge, 2005. 13. Halas G, Schultz AS, Rothney J, et al. A scoping review protocol to map the research foci trends in tobacco control over the last decade. BMJ Open 2015;5:e006643. 14. Nelson ML, Kelloway L, Dawson D, et al. Stroke rehabilitation and patients with multimorbidity: a scoping review protocol. J Comorbidity 2015;5:1-10. 15. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097.
dc.description.volume6
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012058
dc.description.ispublishedpub
dc.description.eprintid4881
rioxxterms.typearticle
refterms.dateAccepted2016-06-09
refterms.dateFCA2017-09-19
refterms.dateFCD2017-09-19
qmu.authorHaraldsdottir, Erna
qmu.centreCentre for Person-centred Practise Research
dc.description.statuspub
dc.description.number7


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record