An integrative review of Indigenous informal caregiving in the context of dementia care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To appraise the empirical literature on the needs of Indigenous informal caregivers caring for people living with dementia in Indigenous communities. DESIGN: Whittemore and Knafl's updated approach to integrative reviews, PRISMA guidelines, and CASP checklists for narrative analysis were followed. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of published empirical literature from January 2010 to August 2020 was undertaken in six databases. REVIEW METHODS: Fifty-one studies met the research question and the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Five themes describe the findings: Decolonizing Western perspectives on dementia, the centrality of cultural safety, caregivers' experiences, pre-dementia community education and family and community-centred care emerged from the thematic analysis. Most of the studies used quantitative methodologies, and few studies were conducted using community-based approaches. CONCLUSION: This review shows that Indigenous caregiving represents an emerging field in nursing and health sciences in a context of a global crisis. Researchers need to focus on Indigenous values and voices to adapt care and support informal caregivers. Our review emphasizes that working with Indigenous communities will likely translate into new care delivery models, policies and practices to support Indigenous informal caregivers and address the specific social determinants impacting caregivers' roles and tasks. IMPACT: This review highlights the necessity of having community and family-based discussions on enhancing the delivery of dementia care for Indigenous peoples in Canada and worldwide. Decolonizing Western perspectives of dementia translate into culturally safe approaches that aim to integrate Indigenous cultural perspectives of holism, reciprocity, wisdom, respect of older people and relationality into nursing practice. The support of Indigenous informal caregivers requires future studies to address the stigmatizing Western views of dementia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".