Importance of Indigenous elders’ contributions to individual and community wellness: results from a scoping review on social participation and intergenerational solidarity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Wellness is a challenge for Indigenous peoples, partly because Western services do not adopt a holistic approach. By devaluing traditional knowledge, Indigenous values and beliefs, these services lower Indigenous power and affect cultural identities. Indigenous elders participate in intergenerational solidarity by transmitting knowledge, values, and culture in a holistic approach. Despite widespread acceptance of the importance of Indigenous elders' contributions to wellness, a rigorous synthesis of knowledge has never been done. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of how Indigenous elders' social participation contributes to individual and community wellness. METHOD: A scoping review was conducted with Indigenous elders and stakeholders in Québec (Canada). Sixteen databases were searched with 57 keywords. Data from the documents retrieved were analyzed, organized, and synthesized based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. SYNTHESIS: A total of 144 documents were examined, comprising 74 scientific papers and 70 sources from the gray literature. Indigenous elders contributed to wellness mainly through relationships and interactions with other community members and non-Indigenous people (72.2%); intergenerational oral and written communications (70.1%); community, social and civic life (45.8%); volunteering and jobs (35.4%); and family life (29.9%). Elders transmit traditional knowledge, strengthen social cohesion, and help to develop positive attitudes such as reciprocity. Their actions favour disease prevention and health promotion, as including traditional approaches increases the acceptability of health and social services. CONCLUSION: This scoping review highlights the need for longitudinal studies with mixed-method designs involving Indigenous communities at all stages of the research to deepen understanding of the contributions of Indigenous elders to individual and community wellness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".