ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Measuring Wellness Through Indigenous Partnerships: A Scoping Review.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Positive psychology 4.0: a science of consequence for a world that can no longer wait.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A systematic scoping review for decolonial public and global health: Indigenous frameworks and models of wellbeing from Turtle Island and Moananuiākea.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Measuring health and well-being from preconception to early life in Indigenous populations: a scoping review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Decolonizing healthcare: the role of traditional medicine in building inclusive health systems for Cameroonian women.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Measuring Wellness Through Indigenous Partnerships: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indigenous wellness has been defined in varying contexts by diverse Indigenous Peoples. The existing indicators used to measure wellness are often defined from a Western perspective. Despite the rich conceptualizations of Indigenous wellness, there exists a notable gap in how it can be measured in contemporary contexts through an Indigenous lens. A scoping review methodology with the aim of identifying measures of wellness developed through Indigenous partnerships was carried out. We completed a systematic search in the following electronic databases: PubMed, CINAHL, Psych Info Academic Search Complete, SocIndex, and the Native Health Database. We then carried out a two-stage article screening process to identify eighteen relevant papers. Content analysis was then used to identify (1) the major categories for the partnership contexts utilized in the process for measuring Indigenous wellness and (2) the kinds of measures developed. Five main categories were characterized, including the following: (1) building relationships that uphold Indigenous worldviews is important, (2) a call for co-development protocols that weave multiple worldviews, (3) the need to increase awareness of the limitations in measuring Indigenous wellness, (4) community-specific context is important, and (5) a call for strengths-based indicators. Governments, organizations, and research partners are called upon to support the co-development of meaningful engagement protocols that privilege and reflect Indigenous voices and perspectives when measuring Indigenous wellness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.