scholarly journals Wellbeing of Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Aotearoa (New Zealand) the United States: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 5832
Author(s):  
Alana Gall ◽  
Kate Anderson ◽  
Kirsten Howard ◽  
Abbey Diaz ◽  
Alexandra King ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
The United States ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Health And Wellbeing ◽  
Search Terms ◽  
Aotearoa New Zealand ◽  
Full Text Screening

Despite the health improvements afforded to non-Indigenous peoples in Canada, Aotearoa (New Zealand) and the United States, the Indigenous peoples in these countries continue to endure disproportionately high rates of mortality and morbidity. Indigenous peoples’ concepts and understanding of health and wellbeing are holistic; however, due to their diverse social, political, cultural, environmental and economic contexts within and across countries, wellbeing is not experienced uniformly across all Indigenous populations. We aim to identify aspects of wellbeing important to the Indigenous people in Canada, Aotearoa and the United States. We searched CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and PubMed databases for papers that included key Indigenous and wellbeing search terms from database inception to April 2020. Papers that included a focus on Indigenous adults residing in Canada, Aotearoa and the United States, and that included empirical qualitative data that described at least one aspect of wellbeing were eligible. Data were analysed using the stages of thematic development recommended by Thomas and Harden for thematic synthesis of qualitative research. Our search resulted in 2669 papers being screened for eligibility. Following full-text screening, 100 papers were deemed eligible for inclusion (Aotearoa (New Zealand) n = 16, Canada n = 43, United States n = 41). Themes varied across countries; however, identity, connection, balance and self-determination were common aspects of wellbeing. Having this broader understanding of wellbeing across these cultures can inform decisions made about public health actions and resources.

scholarly journals Virtual Care for Indigenous Populations in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand: Protocol for a Scoping Review (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pat Camp ◽  
Mirha Girt ◽  
Alix Wells ◽  
Adeeb Malas ◽  
Maryke Peter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
The United States ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
Virtual Care ◽  
Full Text Screening

BACKGROUND Indigenous people in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand experience an increased burden of chronic diseases compared to non-Indigenous people in these countries. Lack of necessary services and culturally relevant care for Indigenous people contributes to this burden. Many Indigenous communities have implemented systems, such as virtual care, to improve chronic disease management. Virtual care has extended beyond videoconferencing to include more advanced technologies, such as remote biometric monitoring devices. However, given the historical and ongoing Western intrusion into Indigenous day to day life, these technologies may seem more invasive and thus require additional research on their acceptability and utility within Indigenous populations. OBJECTIVE The objective of this paper is to present the protocol for a scoping review, which aims to map existing evidence. This study is based on the following guiding research question: What are the characteristics of virtual care use by Indigenous adult populations in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand? The subquestions are related to the technology used, health conditions and nature of the virtual care, cultural safety, and key concepts for effective use. METHODS This scoping review protocol is informed by the methodology described by the Joanna Briggs Institute and is supplemented by the frameworks proposed by Arksey and O’Malley and Levac et al. A search for published and gray literature, written in English, and published between 2000 and present will be completed utilizing electronic databases and search engines, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Indigenous Peoples of North America, Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet, Informit, and Native Health Database. Search results will be uploaded to the review software, Covidence, for title and abstract screening before full-text screening begins. This process will be repeated for gray literature. Upon completion, a data abstraction tool will organize the relevant information into categorical formations. RESULTS The search strategy has been confirmed, and the screening of titles and abstracts is underway. As of October 2020, we have identified over 300 articles for full-text screening. CONCLUSIONS Previous reviews have addressed virtual care within Indigenous communities. However, new virtual care technologies have since emerged; subsequently, additional literature has been published. Mapping and synthesizing this literature will inform new directions for research and discussion. CLINICALTRIAL INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT PRR1-10.2196/21860

scholarly journals Virtual Care for Indigenous Populations in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand: Protocol for a Scoping Review

10.2196/21860 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e21860
Author(s):  
Pat Camp ◽  
Mirha Girt ◽  
Alix Wells ◽  
Adeeb Malas ◽  
Maryke Peter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
The United States ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
Virtual Care ◽  
Full Text Screening

Background Indigenous people in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand experience an increased burden of chronic diseases compared to non-Indigenous people in these countries. Lack of necessary services and culturally relevant care for Indigenous people contributes to this burden. Many Indigenous communities have implemented systems, such as virtual care, to improve chronic disease management. Virtual care has extended beyond videoconferencing to include more advanced technologies, such as remote biometric monitoring devices. However, given the historical and ongoing Western intrusion into Indigenous day to day life, these technologies may seem more invasive and thus require additional research on their acceptability and utility within Indigenous populations. Objective The objective of this paper is to present the protocol for a scoping review, which aims to map existing evidence. This study is based on the following guiding research question: What are the characteristics of virtual care use by Indigenous adult populations in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand? The subquestions are related to the technology used, health conditions and nature of the virtual care, cultural safety, and key concepts for effective use. Methods This scoping review protocol is informed by the methodology described by the Joanna Briggs Institute and is supplemented by the frameworks proposed by Arksey and O’Malley and Levac et al. A search for published and gray literature, written in English, and published between 2000 and present will be completed utilizing electronic databases and search engines, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Indigenous Peoples of North America, Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet, Informit, and Native Health Database. Search results will be uploaded to the review software, Covidence, for title and abstract screening before full-text screening begins. This process will be repeated for gray literature. Upon completion, a data abstraction tool will organize the relevant information into categorical formations. Results The search strategy has been confirmed, and the screening of titles and abstracts is underway. As of October 2020, we have identified over 300 articles for full-text screening. Conclusions Previous reviews have addressed virtual care within Indigenous communities. However, new virtual care technologies have since emerged; subsequently, additional literature has been published. Mapping and synthesizing this literature will inform new directions for research and discussion. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/21860

scholarly journals The representation of Indigenous peoples in chronic disease clinical trials in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States

2022 ◽  
pp. 174077452110691
Author(s):  
Valerie Umaefulam ◽  
Tessa Kleissen ◽  
Cheryl Barnabe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Chronic Disease ◽  
General Population ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Population ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Indigenous Populations

Background Indigenous peoples are overrepresented with chronic health conditions and experience suboptimal outcomes compared with non-Indigenous peoples. Genetic variations influence therapeutic responses, thus there are potential risks and harm when extrapolating evidence from the general population to Indigenous peoples. Indigenous population–specific clinical studies, and inclusion of Indigenous peoples in general population clinical trials, are perceived to be rare. Our study (1) identified and characterized Indigenous population–specific chronic disease trials and (2) identified the representation of Indigenous peoples in general population chronic disease trials conducted in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Methods For Objective 1, publicly available clinical trial registries were searched from May 2010 to May 2020 using Indigenous population–specific terms and included for data extraction if in pre-specified chronic disease. For identified trials, we extracted Indigenous population group identity and characteristics, type of intervention, and funding type. For Objective 2, a random selection of 10% of registered clinical trials was performed and the proportion of Indigenous population participants enrolled extracted. Results In total, 170 Indigenous population–specific chronic disease trials were identified. The clinical trials were predominantly behavioral interventions (n = 95). Among general population studies, 830 studies were randomly selected. When race was reported in studies (n = 526), Indigenous individuals were enrolled in 172 studies and constituted 5.6% of the total population enrolled in those studies. Conclusion Clinical trials addressing chronic disease conditions in Indigenous populations are limited. It is crucial to ensure adequate representation of Indigenous peoples in clinical trials to ensure trial data are applicable to their clinical care.

scholarly journals Graeme Morton and David A. Wilson, eds., Irish and Scottish Encounters with Indigenous Peoples: Canada, the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. Montreal & Kingston, London, Ithaca: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2013. Pp. 389. ISBN 9780773541504.

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances Wilkins
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
The United States ◽  
Queen's University

Graeme Morton and David A. Wilson, eds., Irish and Scottish Encounters with Indigenous Peoples: Canada, the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. Montreal & Kingston, London, Ithaca: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2013. Pp. 389. ISBN 9780773541504. $35.00 CAD.

scholarly journals Commercial tobacco and indigenous peoples: a stock take on Framework Convention on Tobacco Control progress

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 574-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raglan Maddox ◽  
Andrew Waa ◽  
Kelley Lee ◽  
Patricia Nez Henderson ◽  
Genevieve Blais ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Search Terms ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Indigenous Participation

BackgroundThe health status and needs of indigenous populations of Australia, Canada and New Zealand are often compared because of the shared experience of colonisation. One enduring impact has been a disproportionately high rate of commercial tobacco use compared with non-indigenous populations. All three countries have ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which acknowledges the harm caused to indigenous peoples by tobacco.Aim and objectivesWe evaluated and compared reporting on FCTC progress related to indigenous peoples by Australia, Canada and New Zealand as States Parties. The critiqued data included disparities in smoking prevalence between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples; extent of indigenous participation in tobacco control development, implementation and evaluation; and what indigenous commercial tobacco reduction interventions were delivered and evaluated.Data sourcesWe searched FCTC: (1) Global Progress Reports for information regarding indigenous peoples in Australia, Canada and New Zealand; and (2) country-specific reports from Australia, Canada and New Zealand between 2007 and 2016.Study selectionTwo of the authors independently reviewed the FCTC Global and respective Country Reports, identifying where indigenous search terms appeared.Data extractionAll data associated with the identified search terms were extracted, and content analysis was applied.ResultsIt is difficult to determine if or what progress has been made to reduce commercial tobacco use by the three States Parties as part of their commitments under FCTC reporting systems. There is some evidence that progress is being made towards reducing indigenous commercial tobacco use, including the implementation of indigenous-focused initiatives. However, there are significant gaps and inconsistencies in reporting. Strengthening FCTC reporting instruments to include standardised indigenous-specific data will help to realise the FCTC Guiding Principles by holding States Parties to account and building momentum for reducing the high prevalence of commercial tobacco use among indigenous peoples.

The Constitution of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia: A Model for Europe?

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-350
Author(s):  
Hanns Engelhardt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
The United States ◽  
Anglican Church ◽  
European Continent ◽  
Aotearoa New Zealand ◽  
Catholic Churches ◽  
The Church

It is a peculiarity of the European continent that there are four independent Anglican jurisdictions side by side: the Church of England with its Diocese in Europe, The Episcopal Church, based in the United States of America, with its Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe, and the Lusitanian and Spanish Reformed Episcopal Churches which are extra-provincial dioceses in the Anglican Communion. Alongside these, there are the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht, with dioceses in the Netherlands, Germany, Austria and Switzerland. All of them are in full communion with each other, but they lack a comprehensive jurisdictional structure; consequently, there are cities where two or three bishops exercise jurisdiction canonically totally separately.

scholarly journals What is the prevalence of current alcohol dependence and how is it measured for Indigenous people in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America? A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Teagan J. Weatherall ◽  
Katherine M. Conigrave ◽  
James H. Conigrave ◽  
K. S. Kylie Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Alcohol Dependence ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
The United States ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Current Alcohol

Abstract Background Alcohol affects Indigenous communities globally that have been colonised. These effects are physical, psychological, financial and cultural. This systematic review aims to describe the prevalence of current (12-month) alcohol dependence in Indigenous Peoples in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America, to identify how it is measured, and if tools have been validated in Indigenous communities. Such information can help inform estimates of likely treatment need. Methods A systematic search of the literature was completed in six electronic databases for reports on current alcohol dependence (moderate to severe alcohol use disorder) published between 1 January 1989–9 July 2020. The following data were extracted: (1) the Indigenous population studied; country, (2) prevalence of dependence, (3) tools used to screen, assess or diagnose current dependence, (4) tools that have been validated in Indigenous populations to screen, assess or diagnose dependence, and (5) quality of the study, assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies. Results A total of 11 studies met eligibility criteria. Eight were cross-sectional surveys, one cohort study, and two were validation studies. Nine studies reported on the prevalence of current (12-month) alcohol dependence, and the range varied widely (3.8–33.3% [all participants], 3–32.8% [males only], 1.3–7.6% [females only]). Eight different tools were used and none were Indigenous-specific. Two tools have been validated in Indigenous (Native American) populations. Conclusion Few studies report on prevalence of current alcohol dependence in community or household samples of Indigenous populations in these four countries. Prevalence varies according to sampling method and site (for example, specific community versus national). Prior work has generally not used tools validated in Indigenous contexts. Collaborations with local Indigenous people may help in the development of culturally appropriate ways of measuring alcohol dependence, incorporating local customs and values. Tools used need to be validated in Indigenous communities, or Indigenous-specific tools developed, validated and used. Prevalence findings can inform health promotion and treatment needs, including funding for primary health care and specialist treatment services.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document