While there exist many individual and organisation-level initiatives aimed at reducing physician burnout and promoting wellness, there are no comprehensive frameworks or guidelines for evaluating initiatives targeted at physicians. To address this gap, we conducted a rapid review to understand the current state of initiative evaluation in this field and develop an evaluation framework for initiatives aimed at physician burnout and wellness.

A rapid review based on the Cochrane rapid review methods guidance.

MEDLINE, Embase and PsycInfo were searched from database inception to 2 May 2024 for concepts related to physicians, wellness initiatives and burnout, and organisational efforts.

We included studies with initiatives aimed at physician burnout, wellness or experience; targeted physicians, residents, fellows and/or physician faculty; were evaluated in some format; and took place within healthcare settings.

Two independent reviewers extracted data according to a standard template. For each study, we noted information related to the type of wellness initiative, evaluation approach, components measured in evaluations (‘evaluation indicators’) and gaps in evaluation. The same reviewers analysed the data quantitatively and thematically. Findings were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

The database search yielded a total of 3786 references, of which 105 were included based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Various types of wellness initiatives (eg, mindfulness, peer support programmes, communities of practice) were delivered multimodally, or via curriculums and workshops, among other formats. Common evaluation approaches included surveys (95%, n=100/105) and interviews or focus groups (17%, n=18/105). Evaluation indicators spanned five categories: impacts (94.3%, n=99/105), participants’ reactions (65.7%, n=69/105), perspective and behaviour changes (46.7%, n=49/105), implementation (45.7%, n=48/105) and continuous improvement (6.7%, n=7/105). Evaluation gaps included limited responses from participants, failure to capture certain indicators (eg, physician turnover) and limited longitudinal measures.

Based on the findings and existing models, we developed a physician-focused evaluation framework, constituting two domains: implementation and impacts. This framework can enable organisations to better understand, assess and improve initiatives aimed at physician well-being, which can have positive impacts on patient care and the healthcare system.

Variations in mental health and sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes of girls/women (cisgender and transgender) and gender-diverse (nonbinary, Two-Spirit, gender fluid, agender, queer, gender neutral) youth with intersectional identities exist and have largely been ignored in the literature. There is a lack of information on how these health services meet the health needs of girls/women and gender-diverse youth with intersectional identities and the quality of such services. The objective of this global realist review is to identify how, why, for whom, in what contexts and to what extent mental health and SRH services meet the health needs of girls/women (cisgender and transgender) and gender-diverse youth (10–25 years) with intersectional identities.

The protocol has been registered with PROSPERO and will follow Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses Quality Standards for Realist Reviews. We will identify the programme theory and implementation determinants of mental health and SRH services for girls/women (cisgender and transgender) and gender-diverse (nonbinary, Two-Spirit, fluid, agender, queer, gender neutral) youth (10–25 years). The scope of the review will be defined in the first stage and will include consultations with youth Advisory Group members and initial programme theory development. An iterative search of scholarly bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science, IBSS) in addition to a grey literature search will take place in the second stage. The third stage will include evidence extraction and synthesis. In the final stage, the narrative will be developed and refined in consultation with Youth Advisory Group members, and findings will be disseminated.

The study was approved by the Research Ethics Board at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (2023/153). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, youth-friendly materials and webinars and national and international conferences.

CRD42024532422.