The Perspectives of Young Indigenous People on Chronic Disease Prevention Programs: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review explores the perspectives of Indigenous young people aged 10 to 24 on programs aimed at preventing chronic diseases, which are prevalent among Indigenous populations and tend to increase with age. This study synthesizes findings from 13 qualitative studies conducted across Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States, involving 441 participants. The analysis identified four key themes. First, safeguarding food sovereignty emerged as a foundational priority, emphasizing access to traditional foods, nutritional needs, and food security. Second, empowering emerging leaders through the transfer of traditional wisdom and knowledge was recognized as vital for fostering agency and influence within communities. Third, strengthening the sociocultural fabric involved promoting community inclusion, securing community buy-in, and emphasizing the importance of elders and family involvement, alongside integrating cultural practices into health initiatives. Fourth, navigating challenges such as disengagement due to limited health knowledge and ambiguity surrounding health trajectories highlighted barriers that need addressing. The findings suggest that effective programs should involve family members, build community capacity, and foster leadership among Indigenous youth. Culturally appropriate community-developed interventions that actively engage Indigenous youth are essential for meaningful impact. This study highlights the importance of partnership with Indigenous communities to develop tailored programs that respect cultural practices and address specific needs, ultimately aiming to reduce the disproportionate burden of chronic disease in Indigenous populations through culturally sensitive youth-centered approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".