MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100671845 · doi:10.1097/or9.0000000000000040

The experiences of caregivers of Indigenous cancer survivors in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States: a systematic review

2020· review· en· W3100671845 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam J. Masa, Helena Martinez-Bredeck, Tamara Butler, Kate Anderson, Afaf Girgis, Samar Aoun, Joan Cunningham, Claire E. Wakefield, Shaouli Shahid, Allan Ben Smith, Gail Garvey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychosocial Oncology Research and Practice · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilCancer Institute NSWMedical Research CouncilAustralian Government
KeywordsCINAHLIndigenousPsycINFOQualitative researchCancer survivorHealth careMedicineNursingMEDLINEScopusFamily caregiversGerontologyPsychologyCancerFamily medicinePsychological interventionPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Caregivers of Indigenous cancer survivors provide critical unpaid support to survivors, yet they rarely receive information or training for this role and may themselves benefit from support services. Little is documented about the experiences of caregivers of Indigenous cancer survivors. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and aggregate qualitative research describing the experiences of caregivers of Indigenous cancer survivors in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. Methods: We systematically searched PsycINFO, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science using keywords relating to Indigenous populations; caregivers; and cancer. Data were extracted from original qualitative research articles published up to March 2020. Results: From 24 full-text articles, 14 articles from 13 studies were analyzed using meta-aggregation. This highlighted key caregiver experiences relating to: the need for information about cancer and services; providing and receiving support; communication challenges and responsibilities; balancing caregiver roles and emotions; and culturally unsafe health systems and settings. Caregivers of Indigenous cancer survivors often act as mediator between Western biomedical approaches to cancer care and Indigenous peoples’ holistic and family-focused views of health and wellbeing, aiming to ensure that both health professionals and the cancer survivors understand each other's perspectives and preferences for care. Caregivers expressed preferences for family-focussed rather than patient-focussed care. Culturally unsafe health care systems created barriers to optimal care. Conclusions: The findings reveal caregivers’ unique experiences of caring for an Indigenous cancer survivor, and identifies several unmet needs which should be appropriately and systematically addressed. Caregivers should be regarded as co-clients with their own needs as well as co-workers with health professionals providing cancer care. Ultimately supporting caregivers will contribute to improving health outcomes for Indigenous cancer survivors.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.312
GPT teacher head0.583
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychosocial Oncology Research and PracticeSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207