Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33729648›Full record

SynthesisHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2021

Stakeholder perspectives on the implementation and impact of Indigenous health interventions: A systematic review of qualitative studies.

Shingisai Chando, Allison Tong, Martin Howell, Michelle Dickson, Jonathan C Craig, Jack DeLacy, Sandra J Eades, Kirsten Howard

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Stakeholder perspectives on the implementation and impact of Indigenous health interventions: A systematic review of qualitative studies.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shingisai ChandoSydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4521-3491
Allison TongSydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Martin HowellSydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Michelle DicksonSydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jonathan C CraigCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Jack DeLacySydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sandra J EadesMedical School, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Kirsten HowardSydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUCurtin University · AUFlinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvaluations of health interventions for Indigenous peoples rarely report outcomes that reflect participant and community perspectives of their experiences. Inclusion of such data may provide a fuller picture of the impact of health programmes and improve the usefulness of evaluation assessments.

aimTo describe stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation and impact of Indigenous health programmes.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies evaluating complex health interventions designed for Indigenous communities in high-income countries. We searched 6 electronic databases (through to January 2020): MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EconLit and CINAHL and hand-searched reference lists of relevant articles.

resultsFrom 28 studies involving 677 stakeholders (mostly clinical staff and participants), six main themes were identified: enabling engagement, regaining control of health, improving social health and belonging, preserving community and culture, cultivating hope for a better life, and threats to long-term programme viability.

conclusionThe prominence of social, emotional and spiritual well-being as important aspects of the health journey for participants in this review highlights the need to reframe evaluations of health programmes implemented in Indigenous communities away from assessments that focus on commonly used biomedical measures. Evaluators, in consultation with the community, should consistently assess the capacity of health professionals to meet community needs and expectations throughout the life of the programme. Evaluations that include qualitative data on participant and community-level outcomes can improve decision-makers' understanding of the impact that health programmes have on communities. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This paper is a review of evaluation studies and did not involve patients or the public.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelHumansQualitative Researchhealth policyhealth servicesimpact evaluationIndigenous healthoutcomes

Identifiers

PMID33729648
PMCPMC8235882
OpenAlexW3137500163

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.