Dimensions of Self-Compassion Among Healthcare Leaders: A Scoping Review

Aim and Review Question The purpose of this review is to examine how self-compassion among healthcare leaders and managers has been studied and to identify the various dimensions of self-compassion recognized within the research literature. The objective is to deepen understanding of the significance of self-compassion in healthcare leadership and to generate knowledge that can inform leadership education and the development of leadership practices. The review questions: 1. How has self-compassion among healthcare leaders been studied? 2. What dimensions of self-compassion among healthcare leaders have been identified in the research literature? Methods This study will be conducted as a scoping review, which is appropriate for mapping and synthesizing evidence on a broadly studied but conceptually fragmented phenomenon (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Munn et al., 2018). The review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews (Peters et al., 2020; Peters et al., 2021) and will be reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines (Tricco et al., 2018). Eligibility criteria will be defined according to the PCC framework (Participants, Concept, Context) (Peters et al., 2020). Participants will include healthcare leaders and professionals. The concept of interest is leaders’ self-compassion and related experiences and perceptions. The context includes healthcare organizations in both public and private sectors without geographical limitations. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method original research studies will be included. Editorials, theses, conference papers, and opinion papers may also be considered if they meet the inclusion criteria. Reviews will be excluded. Publications in English, Finnish, and Swedish will be included without time restrictions. The search strategy will be conducted in three stages (Peters et al., 2020). Searches will be performed in CINAHL, Medic, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Grey literature will be searched using the MedNar search engine. Reference lists of included studies will be screened manually to ensure comprehensive coverage (Aromataris & Munn, 2020). The search strategy will be developed based on preliminary searches, with the assistance of an information specialist. Search results will be imported into Covidence (Covidence Systematic Review Software, 2021), where duplicates will be removed. Study selection will proceed from title and abstract screening to full-text assessment, conducted independently by two reviewers (Peters et al., 2020). The selection process will be reported using a PRISMA flow diagram (Page et al., 2021). Data will be analysed using narrative synthesis (Popay et al., 2006), which enables systematic organization of methodologically heterogeneous evidence (Rodgers et al., 2009). The analysis will proceed through familiarization with the data, thematic categorization, and interpretative synthesis (Munn et al., 2018). An inductive, data-driven approach will be applied (Aromataris & Munn, 2020). Rigor will be strengthened through clearly defined eligibility criteria, a systematic search process, and independent screening by two reviewers (Peters et al., 2021; Polit & Beck, 2017). The search strategy will be carefully developed based on preliminary searches (Peters et al., 2020 ). Data extraction Data will be extracted from the included studies using a structured form based on JBI guidance to record key information such as authors, country, methodology, participant characteristics, and main findings (Peters et al., 2020). The collected data will be analyzed using narrative synthesis, progressing through four stages to build a thematic and comprehensive overview of how self-compassion has been studied and understood among healthcare leaders (Popay et al., 2006; Munn et al., 2018). References Arksey, H., & O'malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology, 8(1), 19-32. Aromataris, E., & Munn, Z. (2020). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Joanna Briggs Institute. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01 Covidence Systematic Review Software. 2021. Covidence Systematic Review Software. Veritas Health Innovation. http:// www. covid ence. org/ . Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews 10(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s1364 3-021-01626-4. Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Munn, Z., Tricco, A. C., & Khalil, H. (2020). Chapter 11: Scoping reviews. In JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-12 Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., ym. (2021). Scoping reviews: Reinforcing and advancing the methodology. Systematic Reviews, 10, 263. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3 Polit, D.F. & Beck, C.T. (2017). Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2015.01.005 Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., ... & Duffy, S. (2006). Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews. ESRC Methods Programme. Rodgers, M., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Roberts, H., Britten, N., & Popay, J. (2009). Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function. Evaluation, 15(1), 49-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389008097871 Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., ... & Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850