Refugee-serving primary health centres/clinics (PHCs) provide culturally safe, integrated care for refugee children, yet little is known about how their health conditions and outcomes are assessed. This scoping review examines the current literature on the health conditions and outcomes of refugee children aged 0–5 years and how they are measured in refugee-serving PHCs in Canada. In partnership with the New Canadians Health Centre and guided by Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidelines, we systematically searched Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and Embase. Included studies focused on refugee children in Canada and reported health conditions, outcomes, and their measurements within PHCs. Twenty-five studies (2008–2024) met the inclusion criteria, most from Ontario (n = 11), followed by Alberta and Saskatchewan (n = 4 each). Reported health conditions or outcomes (n = 24) spanned the physical (n = 19), developmental, and mental health domains (n = 5). Communicable (e.g., gastrointestinal infections, hepatitis) and non-communicable conditions (e.g., malnutrition, vitamin D deficiency) were mostly reported. Although some standardized approaches were used, substantial variability exists across provinces and conditions or outcomes measured. Findings reveal a disproportionate focus on physical health and notable variability and gaps in child health measures, limited cultural adaptation, and lack of longitudinal data. Standardized, culturally responsive, and age-appropriate measurement approaches are needed to enhance health equity and inform evidence-based policy for refugee children in Canada.

Refugee-serving primary health centres/clinics (PHCs) provide culturally safe, integrated care for refugee children, yet little is known about how their health conditions and outcomes are assessed. This scoping review examined the health conditions and outcomes of refugee children aged 0-5 years and how they are measured in refugee-serving PHCs in Canada. Conducted in partnership with the New Canadians Health Centre and guided by Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidelines, we systematically searched Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and Embase. Included studies focused on refugee children in Canada and reported health conditions, outcomes, and their measurements within PHCs. Twenty-five studies (2008–2024) met the inclusion criteria, most from Ontario (n=11), followed by Alberta and Saskatchewan (n=4 each). Reported health conditions or outcomes (n=24) spanned physical (n=19), developmental, and mental health domains (n=5). Communicable (e.g., gastrointestinal infections, hepatitis) and non-communicable conditions (e.g., malnutrition, vitamin D deficiency) were mostly reported. Although some standardized approaches were used, variability exists across provinces and conditions or outcomes measured. Findings reveal disproportionate focus on physical health and notable variability and gaps in child health measures, limited cultural adaptation, and lack of longitudinal data. Standardized, culturally responsive, and age-appropriate measurement approaches are needed to enhance health equity and inform evidence-based policy for refugee children in Canada.

Increasing demand to demonstrate the societal impact of research and innovation investments comes not only from government and funders for accountability purposes, but also private industry and others, who want to use impact evaluation to inform ways of increasing benefits, and improve their return on investment. Citizens also wish to see an increase in benefits to their region. Impact assessments should also further the understanding of “what works or does not work, under what conditions for whom”. In Alberta, Canada, we developed a “fit for purpose” performance and impact management system that aims to assess impact and optimize returns for decision makers while engaging users. This paper describes the Alberta team’s work that evolved from applying an evidence-based practice framework for evaluating research impact. Drawing on various theories, methodological developments resulted from testing models and approaches across sectors for generating practice-based evidence. The paper outlines the evolution across six phases that contribute to the international literature, and highlights the development of applications, resulting in new learnings and reflections with each iteration. Key learnings are that designing for impact upfront, and continuously monitoring and evaluating impact are effective tools to inform adjustments along implementation pathways to enhance impact. Transitioning to a holistic systems approach that values quantitative and qualitative methods, and combines evidence from impact management systems is necessary for assessing challenge type initiatives. A promising practice is conducting complementary deep-dive realist impact assessment case studies to help understand “how” and “why” the impact occurred and who benefited.

Forcibly displaced refugees often face unmet health needs and barriers to care after resettlement. In response, many resettlement countries have established specialized health clinics and centres. However, evidence on refugees’ healthcare experiences and outcomes within these diverse models of care remains limited. This study examines refugee patients’ experiences and perceived outcomes at the New Canadians Health Centre, a specialized refugee community health centre in Western Canada that provides primary healthcare during the first two years of resettlement, guided by principles for social justice, equity, and inclusion. Through community-based participatory research and qualitative description, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 patients, including men and women from seven different countries of birth, and analysed inductively using qualitative content analysis. Patients reported improved access to care through reduced individual and structural barriers; receipt of comprehensive care facilitated by integrated services; strong trust and cultural safety fostered by supportive patient and healthcare provider relationships; enhanced health literacy and greater capacity for system navigation; and perceived improvements in overall health and wellbeing. Opportunities to continue to strengthen care were also identified. The findings highlight key aspects of the centre’s model of care that strengthened refugees’ healthcare experiences, including phone-based interpretation, proactive patient outreach, and caring healthcare providers, along with opportunities to refine services to better address evolving needs. These insights can inform the development and enhancement of refugee-serving healthcare models across international resettlement contexts.