ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Models of care for Indigenous children in rural and remote settings: A global scoping review.
Article in PLOS global public 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indigenous communities internationally have demonstrated remarkable strength despite significant challenges. Health disparities among Indigenous peoples persist due to historical injustices and ongoing racial discrimination, not inherent vulnerabilities. Disparities are rooted in a legacy of colonisation, systemic exclusion, and socio-economic inequities impacting access to healthcare, education, and employment. Preliminary searches show limited literature on models of care for remote living Indigenous children. This review aimed to identify internationally, effective models of care for Indigenous children in rural and remote areas. A scoping review was conducted, analysing literature on models of care for remote Indigenous children. This study followed the JBI's Scoping Review Guidance and PRISMA Scoping Review guideline. Inclusion criteria were aged ≤18, rural or remote areas, majority Indigenous, reported health outcomes, described a model of care, in English, and published since 1990. Data were systematically extracted, quality appraised using the 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool' then analysed using descriptive-analytical methodology. This review included 16 papers: 8 case series, 3 qualitative studies, and 5 trials. Of these, 7 studies were in Australia, 7 in the USA and 2 in Canada. All studies primary aim was to improve quality of care. Models of care described in the included papers varied, being delivered in traditional healthcare settings, homes, and elsewhere in the community. This review provides insights into the design and implementation of models of care in remote communities with primarily Indigenous populations. The authors recommend 1) that future reviews privilege 'realist evaluation' when examining models of care, 2) designers consider whether a model of care will run for a fixed-period versus ongoing as they have different requirements for success and 3) a toolkit approach to model of care development like the Qungasvik toolkit which provides evidenced modules adaptable to local conditions, easing workload on local people developing programs.
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.