Systematic review of Indigenous cultural safety training interventions for healthcare professionals in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To synthesise and appraise the design and impact of peer-reviewed evaluations of Indigenous cultural safety training programmes and workshops for healthcare workers in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and/or the United States. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Bibliography of Indigenous Peoples in North America, Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts, ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science's Social Sciences Citation Index and Science Citation Index from 1 January 2006 to 12 May 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies that evaluated the outcomes of educational interventions for selecting studies: designed to improve cultural safety, cultural competency and/or cultural awareness for non-Indigenous adult healthcare professionals in Canada, Australia, New Zealand or the United States. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Our team of Indigenous and allied scientists tailored existing data extraction and quality appraisal tools with input from Indigenous health service partners. We synthesised the results using an iterative narrative approach. RESULTS: 2442 unique titles and abstracts met screening criteria. 13 full texts met full inclusion and quality appraisal criteria. Study designs, intervention characteristics and outcome measures were heterogeneous. Nine studies used mixed methods, two used qualitative methods and two used quantitative methods. Training participants included nurses, family practice residents, specialised practitioners and providers serving specific subpopulations. Theoretical frameworks and pedagogical approaches varied across programmes, which contained overlapping course content. Study outcomes were primarily learner oriented and focused on self-reported changes in knowledge, awareness, beliefs, attitudes and/or the confidence and skills to provide care for Indigenous peoples. The involvement of local Indigenous communities in the development, implementation and evaluation of the interventions was limited. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of specific content and approaches to cultural safety training on improving non-Indigenous health professionals' knowledge of and skills to deliver quality, non-discriminatory care to Indigenous patients. Future research is needed that advances the methodological rigour of training evaluations, is focused on observed clinical outcomes, and is better aligned to local, regional,and/or national Indigenous priorities and needs.
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 | 0.008 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".