The COVID-19 pandemic led to major disruptions in society across many spheres, including healthcare, the economy and social behaviours. While early predictions warned of an increased risk of suicide during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, rates of suicide deaths remained stable or decreased over that period for most countries. In contrast, the prevalence of suicidal ideation doubled and suicide attempts slightly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in the adult general population worldwide, accompanied by a higher prevalence of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders. While these data can tell us what happened, they cannot tell us why. Qualitative suicide research seeks to understand experiences of individuals with suicide-related thoughts and behaviours, provides an in-depth exploration of their lives and interactions with others and centres their views and unique context. There is little qualitative research focusing on suicidality during the pandemic. This study will use a qualitative approach to explore the extent and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canadians who experienced suicidality and review their experiences of accessing mental healthcare to identify key components in supporting safety and recovery.

This study will involve approximately 100 semistructured interviews with participants across four Canadian provinces and will explore experiences with suicide-related thoughts and behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. Transcripts will be analysed through qualitative analysis informed by constructivist grounded theory.

The study was approved by the Research Ethics Board of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto Academic Health Sciences Network (for JZ: CAMH REB No 104-2022). In addition to traditional peer-reviewed presentations and publications, a report will make study findings accessible to policy makers, media and the public.

Amid growing concerns about primary care accessibility and the need to support longitudinal, community-based models of care, Canadian provinces have implemented major reforms to how family physicians are paid. These models share objectives of making longitudinal, community-based family practice more attractive and, to some degree, addressing long-standing disparities in pay between family medicine and other specialties. These new remuneration models require robust evaluation to guide improvements, future investments and planning.

We will conduct a multimethod study to explore physician perceptions and outcomes of these new models. First, we will complete semi-structured interviews with family physicians in British Columbia, Manitoba and Nova Scotia (provinces where a new blended compensation model has been introduced). Interviews will explore family physicians’ motivations for moving onto the blended compensation model; how the model has impacted their practice, administrative burden, visit length, capacity, changes to care coordination; and other areas of interest. Second, using provincial and national administrative datasets, we will assess the impact of these payment reforms on service volume, attachment/enrolment, continuity of care, and costs.

We have obtained cross-jurisdictional ethics approvals from Research Ethics British Columbia for the qualitative components and Nova Scotia Health for the quantitative components of this research. Harmonised ethics approvals have been obtained from additional institutions across all study regions. We will create summaries of findings of provincial and cross-provincial analyses and share them with relevant policymakers, physician associations and study participants. Our dissemination will also include traditional publications such as peer-reviewed articles, commentaries/editorials, and academic conferences.