Indigenous women's health and data sovereignty: imagining an Indigenous research methodology using quantitative methods.

Chloe Crosschild, Colleen Varcoe, Helen J Brown, Annette J Browne

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in AlterNative (Auckland, N.Z. : 2005), 2026. 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

4 authors.

Chloe CrosschildSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Applied Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6931-118X

Colleen VarcoeSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Applied Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9090-2793

Helen J BrownSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Applied Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Canada.

Annette J BrowneSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Applied Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6320-4428

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article explores Indigenous Research Methodologies (IRM) in the context of Indigenous women's health, integrating principles of Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDS) and theoretical ideas from Critical Indigenous Feminism (CIF) and Red Intersectionality (RI). Building on ongoing critiques of dominant Eurocentric health research paradigms, we advocate for IRM to guide quantitative methods that typically exclude Indigenous Peoples and perspectives, perpetuating colonial practices. Incorporating ideas underpinning notions of RI into quantitative studies centers analyses of how colonialism and racism intersect with gender in research with Indigenous women. The authors also call for IDS to ensure Indigenous women have authority over health data and highlight the importance of relational accountability and ethics in research involving Indigenous communities.

Indexed as

Critical Indigenous FeminismIndigenous Data SovereigntyIndigenous peopleIndigenous research methodologyIndigenous women’s healthquantitative methodsRed Intersectionalityresearch methods

Identifiers

PMID41940238

DOI10.1177/11771801251392925

PMCPMC13044471

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.