Experimental studies testing interventions to promote cultural safety, interculturality or antiracism in healthcare: protocol for a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cultural safety, interculturality and antiracism are crucial concepts in addressing health disparities of minority and diverse groups. Measuring them is challenging, however, due to overlapping meanings and their highly contextual nature. Community engagement is essential for evaluating these concepts, yet the methods for social inclusion and protocols for participation remain unclear. This review identifies experimental studies that measure changes resulting from culturally safe, intercultural or antiracist healthcare. The review will describe outcomes and additional factors addressed in these studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study focuses on epidemiological experiments with counterfactual comparisons and explicit interventions involving culturally safe, intercultural or antiracist healthcare. The search strategy covers PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, LILACS and WHO IRIS databases. We will use critical appraisal tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute to assess the quality of randomised and non-randomised experimental studies. Two researchers will screen references, select studies and extract data to summarise the main characteristics of the studies, their approach to the three concepts under study and the reported effect measures. We will use fuzzy cognitive mapping models based on the causal relationships reported in the literature. We will consider the strength of the relationships depicted in the maps as a function of the effect measure reported in the study. Measures of centrality will identify factors with higher contributions to the outcomes of interest. Illustrative intervention modelling will use what-if scenarios based on the maps. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review of published literature does not require ethical approval. We will publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal and present them at conferences. The maps emerging from the process will serve as evidence-based models to facilitate discussions with Indigenous communities to further the dialogue on the contributing factors and assessment of cultural safety, interculturality and antiracism. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023418459.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".