ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2025
The responsiveness of surgical research to Māori in Aotearoa, New Zealand-a scoping review.
Review in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Access to bariatric surgery in Aotearoa, New Zealand - a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Māori, the Indigenous people of Aotearoa, New Zealand (NZ), experience significant inequities in access to surgery and postoperative outcomes. This scoping review aimed to present a synopsis of the extent and nature of research concerning Māori in surgery in NZ and evaluated the responsiveness of this evidence base to Māori using two Indigenous frameworks. Methods: Utilising a Kaupapa Māori methodological stance, a scoping review of all studies related to Māori and surgical care in NZ (2000-2024) was performed. The studies underwent thorough evaluation using the CONSIDER and MĀORI frameworks to assess responsiveness to Indigenous Māori. Findings: A total of 254 studies were included, most being quantitative (N = 230, 91%) and most categorised under General Surgery (N = 139, 55%). Māori responsiveness assessments of each study highlighted significant shortcomings, with 96% of studies (N = 243/254) rated as low quality as per the adapted CONSIDER framework and 68% (N = 172/254) rated as low quality in accordance with the MĀORI framework. More than half of all studies (55%) did not report Māori leadership, governance, and co-authorship. Studies that utilised Kaupapa Māori research were more likely to be considered high-quality. Interpretation: This study shows that the current surgical evidence base is not responsive to Māori. It calls for a review of research practices and encourages monitoring of the surgical evidence base for all Indigenous peoples. Funding: This study was supported by a Health Research Council of New Zealand Health Delivery Research Activation Grant (21/860) and Māori Health Knowledge Translation Grant (25/234). The funders had no role in the study design, conception, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or report writing. They also had no role in submitting our study for publication.
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.