Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33258789›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2020

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

Pat Camp, Mirha Girt, Alix Wells, Adeeb Malas, Maryke Peter, Stephanie Crosbie, Travis Holyk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Pat CampCentre for Heart Lung Innovation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9152-8251
Mirha Girt *Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1079-0195
Alix Wells *Carrier Sekani Family Services, University of British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7546-5350
Adeeb MalasFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0717-9974
Maryke PeterNo affiliation, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8481-1091
Stephanie CrosbieNo affiliation, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2541-101X
Travis HolykCarrier Sekani Family Services, University of British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6035-5418

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndigenous 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.

objectiveThe 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.

methodsThis 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.

resultsThe 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.

conclusionsPrevious 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.

Indexed as

acceptabilityaccessibilitycultural competencyfeasibilityIndigenousIndigenous healthutilityvirtual care

Identifiers

PMID33258789
PMCPMC7738260

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.