Experiences of Black and Latin American populations accessing palliative care in Canada and the United States: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OPEN JOURNAL SYSTEMS ARTICLE TOOLS Print this article Indexing metadata How to cite item Email this article Email the author Journal Help USER You are logged in as... sherrikeller My Profile Log Out LANGUAGE Select Language English JOURNAL CONTENT Search Search Scope All Browse By Issue By Author By Title FONT SIZE Make font size smallerMake font size defaultMake font size larger INFORMATION For Readers For Authors For Librarians CURRENT ISSUE Atom logo RSS2 logo RSS1 logo HOME ABOUT USER HOME SEARCH CURRENT ARCHIVES ANNOUNCEMENTS CANO/ACIO Home > Vol 35, No 6 (2025) > Chomay Experiences of Black and Latin American populations accessing palliative care in Canada and the United States: A scoping review Caleb Morgan Chomay, Abby Garner, Nahyeni Bassah, Anna Santos Salas Abstract Background: Access to palliative care among Black and Latin American populations in Canada and the United States (US) is not understood well. Objectives: We undertook a scoping review to summarize literature on the experiences of Black and Latin American populations accessing palliative care in Canada and the US, as well as to identify research gaps. Design and methods: We followed Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review framework and the PRISMA-ScR checklist. We included primary research studies conducted in Canada or the United States, published in English between 2018–2025, that reported either a qualitative or mixed-methods design. Participants were either Black or Latin American, aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with advanced cancer, and accessing palliative care. Studies involving family members, primary care providers, or community leaders, with these populations were also included. We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Methods: Title, abstract, and full text screening, and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Descriptive and thematic analysis was completed. Results: The search identified 579 citations, of which eight qualitative/mixed-methods studies were included. No articles were from Canada. Four themes were identified, revealing that barriers to accessing palliative care are mistrust, communication barriers, cultural differences between patients and providers, and the influence of the social determinants of health (i.e., low socioeconomic status, precarious employment, immigration status, geographical location, and racism). Conclusion: Review of these qualitative findings suggest that racialized populations experience significant barriers in access to palliative care services. Our review identified gaps in palliative care research with racialized peoples in Canada suggesting a need for research in this area. Keywords: palliative care, Canada, United States, health care access, social determinants of health, Black, Latin American, qualitative research
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 | 0.038 | 0.099 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.029 | 0.046 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".