MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7102670436 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/z9wp5

Indigenous Perspectives and Experiences Regarding Childhood Arthritis in Canada and the United States: A Scoping Review Protocol

2025· other· en· W7102670436 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueOpen Science Framework · 2025
Typeother
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIndigenousPsychosocialArthritisJuvenile rheumatoid arthritisEtiologyIntervention (counseling)Juvenile chronic arthritis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Childhood Arthritis refers to any form of arthritis affecting children, with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) being the most common form (Lites et al., 2023). JIA occurs in children under the age of 16 presenting with arthritis of >=6 weeks duration of unknown etiology (Barnabe et al., 2018; Prakken et al., 2011). It can significantly impair children's physical mobility, growth, development, psychosocial well-being, and overall quality of life due to chronic inflammation, pain, and joint damage (Badarnee et al., 2022; Beeckman et al., 2019). Childhood arthritis also occurs in other systemic rheumatic diseases including systemic lupus erythematosus, juvenile dermatomyositis, systemic vasculitis, and autoinflammatory diseases. The identification of Indigenous children is based on their cultural and/or community ties to Indigenous groups, including First Nations, Métis, and Inuit in Canada (Government of Canada, 2025), and Native American and Alaska Native in the United States (U.S. Department of the Interior, n.d.). These children are at heightened risk for JIA and other related conditions (Barnabe et al., 2018a, 2018b). Studies show that Indigenous people affected by rheumatoid arthritis have experienced more severe outcomes, including greater pain, sleep disturbances, fatigue, and mortality (Barnabe et al., 2018a, 2018b). These exceptional health challenges linked to arthritis are rooted in structural inequities, geographic barriers, and longstanding mistrust in healthcare systems stemming from persistent colonization and intergenerational trauma (Kim, 2019; Vogel, 2015). These structural challenges can profoundly affect how Indigenous families understand, experience, and manage chronic illnesses such as childhood arthritis. These challenges are further exacerbated by the lack of alignment of culturally safe and responsive healthcare approaches that respect and incorporate Indigenous worldviews (Kim, 2019). Despite increasing recognition of the need for Indigenous perspectives and culturally informed care over the recent years (Phillips-Beck et al., 2024), specific scoping reviews on the Indigenous perspectives on the causes and experiences of managing arthritis in Indigenous children are limited. Moreover, mainstream treatment models often prefer Western biomedical approaches rather than including Indigenous knowledge systems, culturally sensitive health approaches, or community-driven health practices that prioritize interconnection, balance, and spiritual growth and understanding (Hitchon et al., 2023). Considering the research gap in experiences, perspectives, and practices related to arthritis in Indigenous children (and their caregivers), and the culture-informed practices used with Indigenous child populations in Canada and the United States, a comprehensive mapping of the existing literature is urgently needed. Although research specifically focused on Indigenous children with arthritis is limited, insights from adult populations offer valuable context. For example, Loyola-Sanchez et al. (2020)’s study explored the experiences of Indigenous persons with arthritis and healthcare providers to inform health service improvements and enhance patient outcomes. On-reserve outreach clinics in Canada emphasized peer support and community building, which helped patients feel validated, reduce isolation, and reclaim their purpose despite chronic illness. Such collective peer models are more effective than individual approaches. Also, patients emphasize a preference for holistic and traditional healing approaches that integrate physical, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of wellness (Loyola-Sanchez et al., 2020). These preferences are often unmet in mainstream systems, leading to mistrust and limited engagement with biomedical treatments (Thurston et al., 2014). The present scoping review aims to synthesize and analyze the reported experiences and perspectives of Indigenous children, parents, and caregivers concerning childhood arthritis in Canada and the United States. By centering Indigenous voices, this review illuminates both the barriers to care and the culturally grounded strategies of resilience and support that families employ. Understanding these lived experiences is essential to informing culturally safe, accessible, and effective care for Indigenous children living with arthritis. This review will shed light on the gaps in existing literature and the direction of development related to research, healthcare policy, and culturally informed care programs. We have specifically focused on Canada and the United States due to their similar healthcare systems and overlapping histories of colonization, residential schooling, and systemic health inequities experienced by Indigenous peoples. Furthermore, while the specific cultures of Indigenous communities vary widely, there are shared perspectives on health that emphasize the elements incorporating balance, community, spirituality, and intergenerational relationships that shape culturally informed care practices in both countries (Gall et al., 2021). Geographical focus allows for a meaningful comparison.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Communication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Protocole · Signal consensuel: Protocole
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,801
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,003
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0030,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,336
Écart entre enseignants0,324 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreProtocole

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOpen Science FrameworkTravaux en français237 207