ArticleBMC global and public health2024
Culturally safe and ethical biomarker and genomic research with Indigenous peoples-a scoping review.
Article in BMC global and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Willing, but unequally: Indigenous identity influences participation in Alzheimer's disease biomarker research in Chile.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndigenous peoples globally continue to be underrepresented in biomarker, genomic, and biobanking research. The aim of this study was to identify core components of culturally safe and ethical biomarker and genomic research with Indigenous peoples in Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand, Canada and the USA.
methodsA scoping review with a systematic search strategy was conducted utilising electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL and Global Health. Key search terms included 'biomarkers' and 'genomics' research involving Indigenous peoples in relation to ethical and legal principles of respect, sovereignty, governance and existing policies. Original research studies published from the year 2000 to the 1st of August 2023 were reviewed in a systematic manner. Components of culturally safe and ethical research processes were identified and synthesised descriptively. The quality of included studies was assessed using an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool through an Indigenous lens.
resultsSeven interrelated research components were identified from seventeen studies as core processes to enhance the cultural safety of biomarker and genomic research. These included building relationships and community engagement, learning, research coordination, logistics, consent, samples and biospecimens, biobank structures and protections and policy. The importance of ensuring self-determination, ownership and decision-making power is emphasised in processes to establish and conduct biomarker and genomic research with Indigenous peoples.
conclusionsComponents that contribute to the cultural safety of biomarker and genomic research processes identified in this scoping review were assembled into a theoretical framework to guide research practice. Further evaluation is required by Indigenous peoples and communities to appropriate and adapt this framework for local use to promote the cultural safety of research processes and minimise barriers to Indigenous peoples' participation in biomarker and genomic research.
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.