Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33072890›Full record

ArticleInnovation in aging2020

Developing the Canadian Indigenous Cognitive Assessment for Use With Indigenous Older Anishinaabe Adults in Ontario, Canada.

Kristen Jacklin, Karen Pitawanakwat, Melissa Blind, Megan E O'Connell, Jennifer Walker, Andrine M Lemieux, Wayne Warry

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innovation in aging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Occupational Therapists' Experiences of Assessments With Indigenous Peoples: A Storytelling Approach.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Neurology. Genetics · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Critiquing the Canadian Model of Client-Centered Enablement (CMCE) for Indigenous Contexts.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kristen JacklinDepartment of Family Medicine and Biobehavioral Health, University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth.
Karen PitawanakwatNaandechige-Gamig Wikwemikong Health Centre, Ontario, Canada.
Melissa BlindMemory Keepers Medical Discovery Team - Health Equity, University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth.
Megan E O'ConnellDepartment of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6159-4322
Jennifer WalkerSchool of Rural and Northern Health, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada.
Andrine M LemieuxDepartment of Family Medicine and Biobehavioral Health, University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth.
Wayne WarryDepartment of Family Medicine and Biobehavioral Health, University of Minnesota Medical School Duluth.
University of Minnesota · USLaurentian University · CAUniversity of Saskatchewan · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesDementia is a growing public health issue for aging Indigenous populations. Current cognitive assessments present varying degrees of cultural, educational, and language bias, impairing their application in Indigenous communities. Our goal is to provide Anishinaabe communities in Canada with a brief cognitive test that can be administered within the community setting by community health workers or professionals. The purpose of this study was to adapt the Kimberly Indigenous Cognitive Assessment (KICA) for use as a brief cognitive test with Anishinaabe populations in Canada. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsWe used a community-based participatory research approach coupled with two-eyed seeing to provide an equitable space for Indigenous knowledge. Adaptation of the KICA was accomplished over 22 months using an iterative cycle of monthly consultations between an 11-member expert Anishinaabe language group (EALG) and the investigators, with ad hoc consultations with an Indigenous Elder, a community advisory council, and the KICA authors. Face validity was established with two pilot studies using cognitive interviewing with Indigenous older adults (

resultsEach question of the KICA was scrutinized by the EALG for cultural appropriateness, language and translation, and cultural safety. Every domain required adaptation to reflect cultural values, specificity of language, tone, and a culturally safe approach. Orientation, verbal comprehension and fluency, praxis, and naming domains required the most adaptations. The first pilot for face validity resulted in additional changes; the second confirmed satisfactory adaptation of all changes. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The research resulted in the new Canadian Indigenous Cognitive Assessment. The findings reveal important cultural and linguistic considerations for cross-cultural cognitive assessment in Indigenous contexts. This new culturally appropriate and safe brief cognitive test may improve case finding accuracy and lead to earlier diagnosis and improved dementia care for Indigenous peoples.

Indexed as

Cognitive assessmentCross-cultural careDementiaIndigenous

Identifiers

PMID33072890
PMCPMC7545789
OpenAlexW3082328467

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.