Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34301234›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2021

Reported sources of health inequities in Indigenous Peoples with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review of quantitative studies.

Tania Huria, Suzanne G Pitama, Lutz Beckert, Jaquelyne Hughes, Nathan Monk, Cameron Lacey, Suetonia C Palmer

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Addressing Intergenerational Inequity in Tobacco-Harm: What Helps Children of Smokers to Remain Nonsmokers?Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tania HuriaMāori Indigenous Health Institute, University of Otago Christchurch, 2 Riccarton Ave, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand. tania.huria@otago.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0003-3533-8610
Suzanne G PitamaMāori Indigenous Health Institute, University of Otago Christchurch, 2 Riccarton Ave, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand.
Lutz BeckertDepartment of Medicine, University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Jaquelyne HughesMenzies School of Health Research, Darwin, Australia.
Nathan MonkDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Cameron LaceyMāori Indigenous Health Institute, University of Otago Christchurch, 2 Riccarton Ave, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand.
Suetonia C PalmerDepartment of Medicine, University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand.
University of Otago · NZMenzies School of Health Research · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo summarise the evidentiary basis related to causes of inequities in chronic kidney disease among Indigenous Peoples.

methodsWe conducted a Kaupapa Māori meta-synthesis evaluating the epidemiology of chronic kidney diseases in Indigenous Peoples. Systematic searching of MEDLINE, Google Scholar, OVID Nursing, CENTRAL and Embase was conducted to 31 December 2019. Eligible studies were quantitative analyses (case series, case-control, cross-sectional or cohort study) including the following Indigenous Peoples: Māori, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, Métis, First Nations Peoples of Canada, First Nations Peoples of the United States of America, Native Hawaiian and Indigenous Peoples of Taiwan. In the first cycle of coding, a descriptive synthesis of the study research aims, methods and outcomes was used to categorise findings inductively based on similarity in meaning using the David R Williams framework headings and subheadings. In the second cycle of analysis, the numbers of studies contributing to each category were summarised by frequency analysis. Completeness of reporting related to health research involving Indigenous Peoples was evaluated using the CONSIDER checklist.

resultsFour thousand three hundred seventy-two unique study reports were screened and 180 studies proved eligible. The key finding was that epidemiological investigators most frequently reported biological processes of chronic kidney disease, particularly type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease as the principal causes of inequities in the burden of chronic kidney disease for colonised Indigenous Peoples. Social and basic causes of unequal health including the influences of economic, political and legal structures on chronic kidney disease burden were infrequently reported or absent in existing literature.

conclusionsIn this systematic review with meta-synthesis, a Kaupapa Māori methodology and the David R Williams framework was used to evaluate reported causes of health differences in chronic kidney disease in Indigenous Peoples. Current epidemiological practice is focussed on biological processes and surface causes of inequity, with limited reporting of the basic and social causes of disparities such as racism, economic and political/legal structures and socioeconomic status as sources of inequities.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Health InequitiesHealth Services, IndigenousIndigenous PeoplesRenal Insufficiency, ChronicAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PeoplesCanadaCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesHumans

Identifiers

PMID34301234
PMCPMC8299576
OpenAlexW3185279766

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.