ArticleJMIR formative research2024
An Exploration of the Goodness of Fit of Web-Based Tools for Māori: Qualitative Study Using Interviews and Focus Groups.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effective Recruitment or Bot Attack? The Challenge of Internet-Based Research Surveys and Recommendations to Reduce Risk and Improve Robustness.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndigenous communities often have poorer health outcomes and services under traditional models of care. In New Zealand, this holds true for Māori people who are tāngata whenua (the indigenous people). Several barriers exist that decrease the likelihood of indigenous communities often have poorer health outcomes and poor service fit under traditional models of care, including access issues, systemic and provider racism, and a lack of culturally safe and responsive services. Web-based interventions (WBIs) have been shown to be effective in supporting mental health and well-being and can overcome some of these barriers. Despite the large number of WBIs developed, more investigation is needed to know how well WBIs fit with an indigenous worldview and how they meet the needs of indigenous communities so that a digitally based future does not drive social and health inequities.
objectiveThis study aims to explore the goodness-of-fit of WBIs of Māori individuals, the indigenous people of Aotearoa/New Zealand.
methodsWe used interviews (n=3) and focus groups (n=5) with 30 Māori participants to explore their views about WBIs. Interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis by members of the research team.
resultsOverall, there was a perception that the design of WBIs did not align with the Māori worldview, which centers around people, relationships, spirituality, and holistic views of well-being. A total of 4 key themes and several subthemes emerged, indicating that WBIs were generally considered a poor fit for Māori. Specifically, the themes were as follows: (1) WBIs are disconnected from the core values of te ao Māori (the Māori worldview), (2) WBIs could be helpful in the right context, (3) there are significant barriers that may make it harder for Māori to use WBIs than other groups, and (4) ways to improve WBIs to help engagement with Māori.
conclusionsWhile WBIs are often considered a way to reduce barriers to care, they may not meet the needs of Māori when used as a stand-alone intervention. If WBIs are continued to be offered, developers and researchers need to consider how to develop WBIs that are responsive and engaging to the needs of indigenous communities rather than driving inequities. Ideally, WBIs should be developed by the people they are intended for to fit with those populations' world views.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.