There are currently no universal evidence-based nutrition guidelines that address the gluten-free (GF) diet for children/youth (4–18 years). A GF food guide was created to help children/youth with coeliac disease (CD) and their families navigate the complexities of following a GF diet. Guide formation was based on pre-guide stakeholder consultations and an evaluation of nutrient intake and dietary patterns. The study objective was to conduct an evaluation on guide content, layout, feasibility and dissemination strategies from end-stakeholder users (children/youth with CD, parents/caregivers and health care professionals). This is a cross-sectional study using a multi-method approach of virtual focus groups and an online survey to conduct stakeholder evaluations. Stakeholders included children/youth (4–18 years), their parents/caregivers in the coeliac community (n 273) and health care professionals (n 80) with both paediatric and CD experience from across Canada. Thematic analysis was performed on focus group responses and open-ended survey questions until thematic saturation was achieved. χ2 and Fisher’s exact statistical analyses were performed on demographic and close-ended survey questions. Stakeholders positively perceived the guide for content, layout, feasibility, ethnicity and usability. Stakeholders found the material visually appealing and engaging with belief that it could effectively be used in multi-ethnic community and clinical-based settings. Guide revisions were made in response to stakeholder consultations to improve food selection (e.g. child-friendly foods), language (e.g. clarity) and layout (e.g. organisation). The evaluation by end-stakeholders provided practical and patient-focused feedback on the guide to enable successful uptake in community and clinical-based settings.

Determining how clinicians should meet their professional obligations to treat patients with Ebola virus disease in nonepidemic settings necessitates considering measures to minimize risks to clinicians, the context of care, and fairness. Minimizing risks includes providing appropriate equipment and training, implementing strategies for reducing exposure to infectious material, identifying a small number of centers to provide care, and determining which risky procedures should be used when they pose minimal likelihood of appreciable clinical benefit. Factors associated with the clinical environment, such as the local prevalence of the disease, the nature of the setting, and the availability of effective treatment, are also relevant to obligations to treat. Fairness demands that the best possible medical care be provided for health care professionals who become infected and that the rights and interests of relevant stakeholders be addressed through policy-making processes. Going forward it will be essential to learn from current approaches and to modify them based on data. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:527–530)

Health professionals working in humanitarian relief projects encounter a range of ethical challenges. Applying professional and ethical norms may be especially challenging in crisis settings where needs are elevated, resources scarce, and socio-political structures strained. Situations when clinicians must decide whether to provide care that is near the margins of their professional competency are a source of moral uncertainty that can give rise to moral distress. The authors suggest that responding ethically to these dilemmas requires more than familiarity with ethical codes of conduct and guidelines; it requires practical wisdom, that is, the ability to relate past experience and general guidance to a current situation in order to render a morally sound action. Two sets of questions are proposed to guide reflection and deliberation for clinicians who face competency dilemmas. The first is prospective and intended to aid clinicians in evaluating an unfolding situation. The second is retrospective and designed to support debriefing about past experiences and difficult situations. The aim of this analysis is to support clinicians in evaluating competency dilemmas and provide ethical care and services.

HuntMR, SchwartzL, FraserV. “How Far Do You Go and Where Are the Issues Surrounding That?” Dilemmas at the Boundaries of Clinical Competency in Humanitarian Health Work. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(5):1-7.