How the CPS team is advancing equity in clinical content
Q&A with CPhA Editor-in-Chief Dr. Sarah Jennings
Over the past several years, CPhA’s editorial team has been undertaking a comprehensive review of CPS content to identify and address bias, racism and discrimination. Building on that foundational work, Editor-in-Chief Dr. Sarah Jennings shares how CPS has evolved in recent years, highlighting key additions, major content updates and how equity considerations are now embedded in ongoing editorial practice.
When you stepped into the Editor-in-Chief role, how did you think about advancing this work?
When I joined CPhA, a significant amount of important groundwork had already been done to identify where bias and gaps existed in our content. My focus has been on moving that forward and making it a foundational part of how we approach everything we do. From developing new content chapters, to revisions big and small, to updates to the clinical tools embedded in CPS, we are ensuring equity considerations are always present.
Rather than treating this as a time-limited initiative, we’ve worked to embed these principles into our editorial policy and review processes so that addressing bias becomes part of how CPS evolves over time.
What are some of the most significant additions to CPS in this area?
Two chapters added in recent years stand out as flagship examples of this work.
Dermatological Considerations in Skin of Colour directly addresses long-standing gaps in clinical education by providing guidance, images and assessment tips that reflect how dermatologic conditions may present across different skin tones.
Similarly, Gender-Affirming Care for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Individuals was added last year to support pharmacists with evidence-based guidance, inclusive language and practical considerations for providing respectful, patient-centred care to transgender and gender-diverse individuals.
Both chapters respond to areas where practitioners told us clearer, more inclusive guidance was needed, and they represent meaningful additions to CPS.
Beyond these new chapters, where has CPS seen the most substantial updates?
One of the most significant recent updates has been the major revision of the Hair Care, Hair Loss and Excessive Hair Growth chapter. This update provided an opportunity to address biases related to hair, race and gender, improve representation across skin tones, and expand guidance on culturally relevant hair practices and care considerations.
In addition, many dermatology chapters continue to be updated with new reference images showing conditions across a range of skin tones, including content related to dandruff and seborrheic dermatitis, diaper dermatitis, fungal nail infections, and viral skin rashes.
These changes help ensure that the content better reflects the diversity of patients pharmacists see in practice.
Language plays a major role in clinical education. How has CPS approached this?
We continue to update the language used to describe dermatological signs and symptoms so that it is both more inclusive and more clinically accurate.
Historically, medical literature often assumed lighter skin as the default, using terms such as “redness” without acknowledging how the same condition may appear in darker skin tones. Where possible, we now use descriptions that reflect a range of presentations—for example, noting how a condition may appear differently in lightly versus darkly pigmented skin.
This isn’t just about inclusivity; it’s about improving clinical accuracy and supporting better assessment and decision-making.
Are there examples beyond dermatology where this work has influenced CPS tools or content?
Yes. An important example is the CPS Renal Function Calculator, which has been updated to remove race-based adjustment factors from its equations in line with current clinical guidance.
This reflects a broader shift in health care away from using race as a proxy in clinical decision-making and ensures that CPS tools align with best practices and evolving evidence.
How do you ensure this work continues going forward?
This is ongoing work. We continue to review and update content, imagery and language, and we regularly assess our editorial policies and processes to ensure they support inclusive, equitable care.
We also seek input from a diverse range of practitioners and subject-matter experts, which is essential in identifying gaps we may not otherwise see. Our goal is for CPS to remain a trusted, clinically rigorous resource that reflects both the diversity of patients in Canada and the realities of contemporary practice.
What message would you share with health professionals using CPS today?
I would emphasize that these updates are about supporting better care. By improving how conditions are described, represented and assessed, we’re helping pharmacists and other health professionals recognize differences, avoid assumptions and provide care that is respectful, accurate and evidence-based for every patient.
Addressing systemic bias and racism in our therapeutic content
