MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400453240 · doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2024-sdc.121

122 Interventions for indigenous peoples making health decisions: a systematic review

2024· review· en· W4400453240 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janet Jull, Kimberly Fairman, Sandy Oliver, Brittany Hesmer, Abdul K. Pullattayil

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Circumpolar Health ResearchQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPsychological interventionSystematic reviewEnvironmental healthComputer scienceEnvironmental planningBusinessPolitical scienceMedicineGeographyMEDLINENursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Introduction</h3> Shared decision making (SDM) facilitates collaboration between people and their healthcare providers for informed health decisions. Our review identified SDM interventions to support Indigenous Peoples making health decisions. <h3>Methods</h3> An Inuit and non-Inuit team of service providers and researchers used an integrated knowledge translation approach with framework synthesis to coproduce a systematic review. We developed a conceptual framework to describe SDM processes and guide identification of studies that describe interventions to support Indigenous Peoples making health decisions. We conducted a search of databases from September 2012 to March 2022, with a grey literature search. Two team members screened and quality appraised included studies for strengths and relevance of studies’ contributions to SDM and Indigenous self-determination. Findings were analyzed descriptively in relation to the conceptual framework. <h3>Results</h3> Of 5068 citations screened, nine studies reported in ten publications were eligible for inclusion. We categorized the studies into clusters identified as: inclusive of Indigenous knowledges and governance (‘Indigenous-oriented’)(n=6); and based on Western academic knowledge and governance (‘Western-oriented’)(n=3). The studies were found to be of variable quality for contributions to SDM and self-determination, with Indigenous-oriented studies of higher overall quality. A revised conceptual framework reflects four themes: 1) where SDM takes place impacts decision making opportunities, 2) little is known about the characteristics of health care providers who engage in SDM processes, 3) community is a partner in SDM, 4) the SDM process involves trust- building. <h3>Discussion</h3> There are few studies that report on and evaluate SDM interventions with Indigenous Peoples. Overall, Indigenous-oriented studies sought to make health care systems more amenable to SDM for Indigenous Peoples, while Western-oriented studies distanced SDM from the health care settings. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Further studies that are solutions-focused and support Indigenous self-determination are needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.323
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207