About Us: The Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table is a group of scientific experts and health system leaders who evaluate and report on emerging evidence relevant to the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform Ontario's response. Our mandate is to provide weekly summaries of relevant scientific evidence for the COVID-19 Health Coordination Table of the Province of Ontario, integrating information from existing scientific tables, Ontario's universities and agencies, and the best global evidence. The Science Table summarizes its findings for the Health Coordination Table and the public in Science Briefs. The Mental Health Working Group comprises scientific experts and public health leaders with specific expertise in mental health. Their expertise spans mental health of children and youth, adults and geriatric populations, mental health of health care providers, women's health, mental health among LGBTQ persons, mental health among Black, Indigenous, and other racialized populations, and COVID-19. The Working Group evaluates emerging scientific evidence related to maintaining mental health during COVID-19, the mental health burden of disease and public health interventions on individuals across the lifespan, including children and adolescents, and the older adult population, as well as the need for assessment and recommendations

BACKGROUND As mental illness continues to affect one in five individuals, and the need for support has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, the promise of digital mental health tools remains largely unrealized due to lack of uptake by patients and providers. OBJECTIVE The specific objective of this project is to develop a web-based resource to support the engagement of mental health providers and patients in the use of digital mental health tools. METHODS The web-based resource was developed using a multi-method approach. We conducted: 1) an environmental scan and engagement of experts in the field; 2) an academic literature review; 3) a grey literature review; and 4) a stakeholder engagement workshop. RESULTS We developed a resource, which is now available publicly online, to support patients' and providers' engagement in the usage of digital mental health tools. Based on a literature review, environmental scan with 27 experts and an engagement workshop with 15 stakeholders, 25 resources were identified and included in the resource guide. The contents of the resource guide are directed at mental health care providers, administrators and patients/clients (inclusive of families/caregivers). CONCLUSIONS The resource guide is now publicly available online for free. Future work should explore how this document can be integrated into clinical care delivery and pathways.

Background There are increasing expectations for researchers and knowledge users in the health system to use a research partnership approach, such as integrated knowledge translation, to increase the relevance and use of research findings in health practice, programmes and policies. However, little is known about how health research trainees engage in research partnership approaches such as IKT. In response, the purpose of this scoping review was to map and characterize the evidence related to using an IKT or other research partnership approach from the perspective of health research trainees in thesis and/or postdoctoral work. Methods We conducted this scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. We searched the following databases in June 2020: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched sources of unpublished studies and grey literature. We reported our findings in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Results We included 74 records that described trainees’ experiences using an IKT or other research partnership approach to health research. The majority of studies involved collaboration with knowledge users in the research question development, recruitment and data collection stages of the research process. Intersecting barriers to IKT or other research partnerships at the individual, interpersonal and organizational levels were reported, including lack of skills in partnership research, competing priorities and trainees’ “outsider” status. We also identified studies that evaluated their IKT approach and reported impacts on partnership formation, such as valuing different perspectives, and enhanced relevance of research. Conclusion Our review provides insights for trainees interested in IKT or other research partnership approaches and offers guidance on how to apply an IKT approach to their research. The review findings can serve as a basis for future reviews and primary research focused on IKT principles, strategies and evaluation. The findings can also inform IKT training efforts such as guideline development and academic programme development.

ObjectivesThe four SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC; Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta) identified by May 2021 are highly transmissible, yet little is known about their impact on public health measures. We aimed to synthesise evidence related to public health measures and VOC.DesignA rapid scoping review.Data sourcesOn 11 May 2021, seven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Central Register of Controlled Trials, Epistemonikos’ L-OVE on COVID-19, medRxiv, bioRxiv) were searched for terms related to VOC, public health measures, transmission and health systems. No limit was placed on date of publication.Eligibility criteriaStudies were included if they reported on any of the four VOCs and public health measures, and were available in English. Only studies reporting on data collected after October 2020, when the first VOC was reported, were included.Data extraction and synthesisTitles, abstracts and full-text articles were screened by two independent reviewers. Data extraction was completed by two independent reviewers using a standardised form. Data synthesis and reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines.ResultsOf the 37 included studies, the majority assessed the impact of Alpha (n=32) and were conducted in Europe (n=12) or the UK (n=9). Most were modelling studies (n=28) and preprints (n=28). The majority of studies reported on infection control measures (n=17), followed by modifying approaches to vaccines (n=13), physical distancing (n=6) and either mask wearing, testing or hand washing (n=2). Findings suggest an accelerated vaccine rollout is needed to mitigate the spread of VOC.ConclusionsThe increased severity of VOC requires proactive public health measures to control their spread. Further research is needed to strengthen the evidence for continued implementation of public health measures in conjunction with vaccine rollout. With no studies reporting on Delta, there is a need for further research on this and other emerging VOC on public health measures.

Objective: The objective of this review was to determine the timing of overall and cause-specific neonatal mortality and severe morbidity during the postnatal period (1-28 days). Introduction: Despite significant focus on improving neonatal outcomes, many newborns continue to die or experience adverse health outcomes. While evidence on neonatal mortality and severe morbidity rates and causes are regularly updated, less is known on the specific timing of when they occur in the neonatal period. Inclusion criteria: This review considered studies that reported on neonatal mortality daily in the first week; weekly in the first month; or day 1, days 2-7, and days 8-28. It also considered studies that reported on timing of severe neonatal morbidity. Studies that reported solely on preterm or high-risk infants were excluded, as these infants require specialized care. Due to the available evidence, mixed samples were included (eg, both preterm and full-term infants), reflecting a neonatal population that may include both low-risk and high-risk infants. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched for published studies on December 20, 2019, and updated on May 10, 2021. Critical appraisal was undertaken by 2 independent reviewers using standardized critical appraisal instruments from JBI. Quantitative data were extracted from included studies independently by 2 reviewers using a study-specific data extraction form. All conflicts were resolved through consensus or discussion with a third reviewer. Where possible, quantitative data were pooled in statistical meta-analysis. Where statistical pooling was not possible, findings were reported narratively. Results: A total of 51 studies from 36 articles reported on relevant outcomes. Of the 48 studies that reported on timing of mortality, there were 6,760,731 live births and 47,551 neonatal deaths with timing known. Of the 34 studies that reported daily deaths in the first week, the highest proportion of deaths occurred on the first day (first 24 hours, 38.8%), followed by day 2 (24-48 hours, 12.3%). Considering weekly mortality within the first month (n = 16 studies), the first week had the highest mortality (71.7%). Based on data from 46 studies, the highest proportion of deaths occurred on day 1 (39.5%), followed closely by days 2-7 (36.8%), with the remainder occurring between days 8 and 28 (23.0%). In terms of causes, birth asphyxia accounted for the highest proportion of deaths on day 1 (68.1%), severe infection between days 2 and 7 (48.1%), and diarrhea between days 8 and 28 (62.7%). Due to heterogeneity, neonatal morbidity data were described narratively. The mean critical appraisal score of all studies was 84% (SD = 16%). Conclusion: Newborns experience high mortality throughout the entire postnatal period, with the highest mortality rate in the first week, particularly on the first day. Ensuring r...