Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37822976›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2023

Reflections on the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study (POIS; 2006-2023): how population-based research can address Māori outcomes and governance.

Emma H Wyeth, Sarah Derrett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Emma H Wyeth *Ngāi Tahu Māori Health Research Unit, Division of Health Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Sarah Derrett *Ngāi Tahu Māori Health Research Unit, Division of Health Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Injury is a leading cause of disability. Twenty years ago, we knew financial costs of injury were high but little was known about the short, medium and long-term outcomes after injury. In 2006, a Pilot Study and engagement with Māori across the country was undertaken to discuss the planned main study to understand how best to design a study that was meaningful and beneficial to Māori and policy-makers. Between 2007-2009, 2,856 injured New Zealanders (including 20% Māori) with an Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) entitlement claim were recruited to the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study (POIS). Participants shared detailed information (at 3, 12 and 24 months, and 12-years post-injury) about a broad range of topics including: the injury, socio-demographics, health, health services access, employment and wellbeing. Administrative data about injury-related hospitalisations, the sentinel injury and subsequent injuries were also collected, as well as in-depth qualitative interviews. This paper focuses on the why, how and impacts of POIS, especially in relation to Māori design and approaches, capability and capacity building, and leadership. Focusing on these aspects for Māori within POIS over time has ensured delivery of findings capable of informing and improving outcomes and policy. In particular, POIS has had considerable impact, influencing ACC's research strategy and outcomes' focus, and has provided disability, health, and wellbeing outcomes knowledge previously unavailable, especially for Māori.

Indexed as

indigenous researchinjury outcomeslongitudinal studyMāoriresearch impact

Identifiers

PMID37822976
PMCPMC10562715

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.