Primary Health Care Providers' Perspectives: Facilitating Older Patients' Access to Community Support Services

The purpose of the study examined in this article was to understand how non-physician health care professionals working in Canadian primary health care settings facilitate older persons’ access to community support services (CSSs). The use of CSSs has positive impacts for clients, yet they are underused from lack of awareness. Using a qualitative description approach, we interviewed 20 health care professionals from various disciplines and primary health care models about the processes they use to link older patients to CSSs. Participants collaborated extensively with interprofessional colleagues within and outside their organizations to fi nd relevant CSSs. They actively engaged patients and families in making these linkages and ensured follow-up. It was troubling to fi nd that they relied on out-of-date resources and ineffi cient search strategies to fi nd CSSs. Our fi ndings can be used to develop resources and approaches to better support primary health care providers in linking older adults to relevant CSSs. 

The L Pack: Addressing the Sexual Health Needs of Young Lesbians

Concerns about the sexual health of women who identify as other than heterosexual have been highlighted in numerous research reports, yet access to information, advice and services remains limited within Northern Ireland. In response to this, a group of young women have produced a sexual health resource (‘‘The L Pack’’) specifically for those who identify as lesbian or bisexual. This article discusses the issue of lesbian sexual health and the rationale for the production of The L Pack. Drawing upon discussions with the young women involved and the various partners, it outlines the participatory process of producing information for young women by young women, the meaning and value of this and the nature of learning for all involved. Illustrating feminist and related principles through practice examples, the article outlines how the project moved from a focus on individual learning to one where the young women involved gained the knowledge, skills and confidence to take their learning to their peers and others.

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

Protocols of systematic reviews and meta-analyses allow for planning and documentation of review methods, act as a guard against arbitrary decision making during review conduct, enable readers to assess for the presence of selective reporting against completed reviews, and, when made publicly available, reduce duplication of efforts and potentially prompt collaboration. Evidence documenting the existence of selective reporting and excessive duplication of reviews on the same or similar topics is accumulating and many calls have been made in support of the documentation and public availability of review protocols. Several efforts have emerged in recent years to rectify these problems, including development of an international register for prospective reviews (PROSPERO) and launch of the first open access journal dedicated to the exclusive publication of systematic review products, including protocols (BioMed Central's Systematic Reviews). Furthering these efforts and building on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, an international group of experts has created a guideline to improve the transparency, accuracy, completeness, and frequency of documented systematic review and meta-analysis protocols--PRISMA-P (for protocols) 2015. The PRISMA-P checklist contains 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol.This PRISMA-P 2015 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides readers with a full understanding of and evidence about the necessity of each item as well as a model example from an existing published protocol. This paper should be read together with the PRISMA-P 2015 statement. Systematic review authors and assessors are strongly encouraged to make use of PRISMA-P when drafting and appraising review protocols.