MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4353099424 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069697

Examining the experiences of Indigenous families seeking health information about caring for sick or injured children: a scoping review

2023· review· en· W4353099424 on OpenAlexafffund
Lisa Knisley, Janice Linton, S. Michelle Driedger, Lisa Hartling, Yuting Sun, Shannon D. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanada Research ChairsChildren's Hospital FoundationStollery Children’s Hospital Foundation
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOIndigenousMedicineHealth careGrey literatureSnowball samplingNursingContext (archaeology)MEDLINEFamily medicinePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Mapping literature on Indigenous families' experiences seeking child health information and identifying barriers and facilitators to information access. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus and CINAHL for peer-reviewed literature and Google Advanced for grey literature. We screened tables of contents of two Indigenous research journals not consistently indexed in online health databases and used snowball sampling to supplement searches. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included full-text, English-language articles, published from 2000 to the time of the search in April 2021, based on: participants (Indigenous families), concept (experiences of families seeking health information) and context (child health). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted: citation details, study purpose, country of study, publication type, study design, data collection method, Indigenous group, family member participants, home/healthcare setting, child health area, how health information was accessed, and information-seeking barriers and facilitators. Data were examined for patterns and trends, results and implications. RESULTS: Among 19 papers (representing 16 research projects) included, nine described family/friends and 19 described healthcare professionals as sources of child health information. Barriers include racism/discrimination during healthcare visits, ineffective communication with healthcare providers and structural barriers (eg, transportation). Facilitators include easy access, improved communication and relationships with healthcare providers, and culturally safe healthcare. CONCLUSION: Indigenous families perceive they do not have access to necessary child health information, which can lead to insensitive, ineffective and unsafe healthcare. A critical gap exists in understanding Indigenous families' information needs and preferences when making decisions about children's health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0260.021
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→