ArticleInternational journal of circumpolar health2025
A field-test of Not Deciding Alone to support Inuit with health decision making: co-production of a mixed methods study guided by aajiiqatigiingniq.
Article in International journal of circumpolar health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shared decision-making supports person-centred care. Our team of Inuit-led and/or -focused organizations and researchers field-tested a strategy called Not Deciding Alone to support health decision-making. Guided by aajiiqatigiingniq, a principle of collective decision-making and consensus-building, we co-produced a mixed-methods study to: (1) train Qikiqtani region community health representatives (CHRs) with a workshop, (2) develop a radio show and survey, and (3) assess the radio show with Inuit community members in the health system. We evaluated participant experiences using forms, case studies, and an online survey. The workshop was delivered to 13 CHRs; seven (54%) provided evaluation data. All (100%) reported positive experiences with the content, activities, and facilitation. One (14%) said the workshop was too short; four (57%) agreed there was enough discussion time. Six (86%) reported new learning. Three radio show events were held with 33 survey respondents, the majority women (
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.