Table 2 Design elements of our facilitated virtual policy dialogue (adapted from Damani et al. [20])

Addresses a high-priority policy issue

Yes

The capacity of MHSUH providers to address emerging population needs is a high-priority national policy issue

Clear meeting objectives

Yes

Policy dialogue objectives were determined in advance and circulated with the invitation and the pre-meeting information package. Objectives were reiterated at the beginning of the policy dialogue verbally and on a shared-screen slide

Pre-circulated information package and evidence summaries

Yes

Participants were provided with an agenda (see Table 1), slide deck containing synthesized literature review and preliminary study findings, and consent form in advance

Materials were available in both French and English, Canada’s two official languages

Environment conducive to deliberations

Yes

Policy dialogue facilitated over Zoom using web-based GDSS technology, shared screens, small breakout rooms facilitated by members of the research team, and an external overarching professional facilitator

Three-hour meeting scheduled during business hours across five Canadian time zones

One breakout room facilitated in French

Clear rules of engagement

Yes

Chatham House Rule followed

Experienced facilitator hired to conduct policy dialogue and train research team in breakout room facilitation and GDSS software use

Recording of discussions

Yes

Main session and breakout rooms in Zoom were recorded

Recording prompt on Zoom required participants to provide consent to record to stay in the meeting

Written consent forms were provided to all participants in advance of the meeting, and the link provided in the Zoom chat box at the start of the meeting

Representation of various stakeholder perspectives (including researchers and knowledge user partners), including those who may be affected by decisions related to the issue

Yes

Participants were purposively selected to represent government, policy and practitioner stakeholders (see Table 3)

Stakeholders included a range of MHSUH providers

Participants were assigned to small-group breakout rooms to maximize variation of perspectives

The research team (including knowledge user partners/advisors) played a key role of discussion group facilitators

Synthesis of high-quality research evidence

Yes

Synthesis of research findings from literature review, pan-Canadian MHSUH provider survey and key stakeholder interviews were provided in advance of the policy dialogue and presented at the beginning of the dialogue

Opportunity for discussion

Yes

Facilitated small-group breakout rooms included 5–7 participants

Combined, two breakout sessions included over 1 hour for discussion

No emphasis on reaching consensus

No

One of the objectives was to assess and foster ‘near’ consensus around the priority policy implications (Focus 1) and next steps (Focus 2) of the research findings

Using an adapted nominal group technique, each group’s top three ideas (based on the small-group discussion) for both focus questions were collated and synthesized into a long list by the expert facilitator, then ranked by individual participants in order by priority

With less time and space for generative discussion in a virtual format (versus in-person), this consensus-building exercise allowed for more focused and concrete discussion

The research team clearly communicated that these priorities would help direct next steps, but no commitment to specific actions was expected from participants

Skilled facilitation

Yes

External expert facilitator (not a stakeholder or part of the research team) hired to facilitate the main session and lead the ranking and voting

Breakout rooms were facilitated by research team members familiar with the subject matter and trained in the use of the GDSS software

Outcome evaluation

Limited

The external expert facilitator provided anonymous post-dialogue evaluation forms to each participant with few completing (n = 11/46)

Outputs developed and action plan put in place

In progress

Critical commentary “call to action” article prepared for publication (Bartram et al. [17])

Multiple conference presentations and keynotes conducted

Infographic developed of research findings including insights from policy dialogue

Webinar conducted as part of the Canadian Health Workforce Network’s annual webinar series (November 2021)

Policy dialogue reflection and follow-up with expert advisory group completed (November 2021)