MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391784148 · doi:10.1186/s12939-024-02118-2

Factors of success, barriers, and the role of frontline workers in Indigenous maternal-child health programs: a scoping review

2024· review· en· W4391784148 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Charlene Thompson, Tara Million, Devan Tchir, Angela Bowen, Michael Szafron

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Equity in Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan HealthSaskatchewan Health Authority
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCINAHLThematic analysisGrey literatureIndigenousNursingMedicineProgram evaluationHealth services researchScopusPublic healthMEDLINEMedical educationQualitative researchPsychological interventionPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite considerable investment in maternal-child programs in Canada, there has been little positive impact on the health of Indigenous mothers and their children. The reasons for this are unclear and there is a need to identify how such programs can be successfully implemented. Community input is essential for successful programs; however, it is unclear what the contributions of frontline workers have been in the health program process, i.e., program development, delivery, and evaluation. Based on these identified gaps, this scoping review aimed to: (1) identify factors of success and barriers to successful Indigenous maternal-child community health programs for mothers and their children aged 0-6 years; and (2) explore how frontline workers are included in the program process. METHODS: This scoping review was completed using the Arksey and O'Malley framework, informed by Levac et al. Four data bases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus), grey literature, and reference lists were searched for relevant materials from 1990-2019. Data was extracted from included articles and analysed using descriptive statistics, thematic analysis with the Braun and Clarke framework, and a Principal Component Analysis. RESULTS: Forty-five peer-reviewed and grey articles were included in the review. Factors of program success included: relationship building; cultural inclusion; knowledge transmission styles; community collaboration; client-centred approaches; Indigenous staff; and operational considerations. Barriers included: impacts of colonization; power structure and governance; client and community barriers to program access; physical and geographical challenges; lack of staff; and operational deficits. Frontline workers were found to have a role in program delivery (n = 45) and development (n = 25). Few (n = 6) had a role in program evaluation. CONCLUSION: Although a better understanding of the frontline worker role in maternal-child health programs was obtained from the review, in a large proportion of literature the authors could not determine if the role went beyond program delivery. In addition, no direct input from frontline workers and their perspectives on program success or barriers were identified, suggesting areas to explore in future research. This review's findings have been applied to inform a community-based participatory research project and may also help improve the development, delivery, and evaluation of Indigenous maternal-child health programs.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0180.023
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.003
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.414 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Equity in HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207