Factors that sustain indigenous youth mentoring programs: a qualitative systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Indigenous youth worldwide continue to experience disproportional rates of poorer mental health and well-being compared to non-Indigenous youth. Mentoring has been known to establish favorable outcomes in many areas of health but is still in its early phases of research within Indigenous contexts. This paper explores the barriers and facilitators of Indigenous youth mentoring programs to improve mental health outcomes and provides evidence for governments' response to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. METHODS: A systematic search for published studies was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and grey literature through Trove, OpenGrey, Indigenous HealthInfoNet, and Informit Indigenous Collection. All papers included in the search were peer-reviewed and published from 2007 to 2021. The Joanna Briggs Institute approaches to critical appraisal, data extraction, data synthesis, and confidence of findings were used. RESULTS: A total of eight papers describing six mentoring programs were included in this review; six papers were from Canada, and two originated from Australia. Studies included mentor perspectives (n = 4) (incorporating views of parents, carers, Aboriginal assistant teachers, Indigenous program facilitators, young adult health leaders, and community Elders), mentee perspectives (n = 1), and both mentor and mentee perspectives (n = 3). Programs were conducted nationally (n = 3) or within specific local Indigenous communities (n = 3) with varying mentor styles and program focus. Five synthesized findings were identified from the data extraction process, each consisting of four categories. These synthesized findings were: establishing cultural relevancy, facilitating environments, building relationships, facilitating community engagement, and leadership responsibilities, which were discussed in the context of extant mentoring theoretical frameworks. CONCLUSION: Mentoring is an appropriate strategy for improving general well-being. However, more research is needed to explore program sustainability and maintaining outcomes in the long term.
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 | 0.021 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".