To summarize information obtained from original research about barriers to access of primary healthcare by Canadian immigrants' and to identify research gaps. Electronic databases of primary research articles and grey literature were searched without restricting the time period. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement was followed for literature selection. Articles were selected based on three criteria: (a) the study population was Canadian legal immigrant(s), (b) the research was about the barriers to accessing primary healthcare in Canada, and (c) the article was written in English. Relevant information from the articles was extracted into tabular format and classified for thematic analysis. Identified barriers were grouped into five themes: cultural, communication, socio-economic status, healthcare system structure and immigrant knowledge. The barriers to accessing primary healthcare in each of these categories can provide insight and subsequent direction for changes needed to improve immigrant care and mitigate their deterioration in health status. The demographic and ethno-cultural distributions of the study populations across the provinces highlight the need to expand research to encompass more varied immigrant groups across more regions of Canada, including more research on male immigrants and immigrant seniors, and to increase research related to health care providers' perspectives on the barriers.

IntroductionImmigrants are among the most vulnerable population groups in North America; they face multidimensional hurdles to obtain proper healthcare. Such barriers result in increased risk of developing acute and chronic conditions. Subsequently a great deal of burden is placed on the healthcare system. Community navigator programs are designed to provide culturally sensitive guidance to vulnerable populations in order to overcome barriers to accessing healthcare. Navigators are healthcare workers who support patients to obtain appropriate healthcare. This scoping review systematically searches and summarizes the literature on community navigators to help immigrant and ethnic minority groups in Canada and the United States overcome barriers to healthcare.MethodsWe systematically searched electronic databases for primary articles and grey literature. Study selection was performed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Articles were selected based on four criteria: (1) the study population was comprised of immigrants or ethnic minorities living in Canada or the United States ; (2) study outcomes were related to chronic disease management or primary care access; (3) the study reported effects of community navigator intervention; (4) the study was published in English. Relevant information from the articles was extracted and reported in the review.ResultOnly one study was found in the literature that focused on navigators for immigrants in Canada. In contrast, 29 articles were found that reported navigator intervention programs for immigrant minorities in the United States. In these studies navigators trained and guided members of several ethnic communities for chronic disease prevention and management, to undertake cancer screening as well as accessing primary healthcare. The studies reported substantial improvement in the immigrant and ethnic minority health outcomes in the United States. The single Canadian study also reported positive outcome of navigators among immigrant women.ConclusionNavigator interventions have not been fully explored in Canada, where as, there have been many studies in the United States and these demonstrated significant improvements in immigrant health outcomes. With many immigrants arriving in Canada each year, community navigators may provide a solution to reduce the existing healthcare barriers and support better health outcomes for new comers.

University rankings have been widely criticized and examined in terms of the environment they create for universities. In this paper, I reverse the question by examining how ranking organizations have responded to criticisms. I contrast ranking values and evaluation with those practiced by academic communities. I argue that the business of ranking higher education institutions is not one that lends itself to isomorphism with scholarly values and evaluation and that this dissonance creates reputational risk for ranking organizations. I argue that such risk caused global ranking organizations to create the Berlin Principles on Ranking Higher Education Institutions, which I also demonstrate are decoupled from actual ranking practices. I argue that the Berlin Principles can be best regarded as a legitimizing practice to institutionalize rankings and symbolically align them with academic values and systems of evaluation in the face of criticism. Finally, I argue that despite dissonance between ranking and academic evaluation, there is still enough similarity that choosing to adopt rankings as a strategy to distinguish one's institution can be regarded as a legitimate option for universities.

In this paper, I describe dividing practices in making up a specific medical-legal category-the revolving door patient-to identify, label, and direct the actions of particular people living with mental illness. The revolving door patient was a category that had been spoken of for some time, but became a formal legal subject with the introduction of the Alberta Mental Health Act 2010 and Community Treatment Orders (CTOs). I demonstrate how a rationale of control over unpredictable and dangerous individuals was primary in creating this new category, and that the characterization of the revolving door patient required a disciplinary technology to reduce danger. I argue that the CTO is a medical-legal technology that solves the problem of governing a subject in order to produce a patient that manages mental illness. I conclude by reflecting on how the narrative of the revolving door patient, and of mental illness more broadly, has implications for personal identity and tensions between care and control. Dans cet article, je décris comment des 'pratiques divisées' ont créé une catégorie spécifique médico-légale - le « revolving door patient » - afin d'identifier, d'étiqueter et de contrôler les comportements de certains individus vivants avec une maladie mentale. Le «revolving door patient», une catégorie dont on avait parlé depuis un certain temps, est devenu un sujet juridique formel par l'introduction de la loi de la santé mentale de l'Alberta 2010 et de l'Ordre de Traitement Communautaire (OCT). Je démontre comment une logique de contrôle sur les individus imprévisibles et dangereux eu un rôle prépondérant lors de la création de cette catégorie et que la caractérisation du «revolving door patient», entant que telle, a nécessité une technologie disciplinaire pour réduire le danger social. Je soutiens que le OTC est une technologie médico-légale qui résout le problème de contrôle d'un sujet en produisant un patient qui gère une maladie mentale. Je conclus en démontrant de quelle façon le «revolving door patient», et la maladie mentale en général, a des répercussions sur l'identité personnelle et produisent des tensions entre les soins et le contrôle.

No abstract