ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2025
Indigenous people's perspectives on sharing health data for service delivery purposes: an inquiry using Indigenous methodologies.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 2025. 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.
- Justice-Oriented Scholarship: Naming and Framing a Critical Imperative in Nursing.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With healthcare's accelerating digital transformation and expanding data-sharing capabilities, it is essential to uphold Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDSov)-which affirms Indigenous ownership and authority over health data relating to Indigenous communities. Indigenous Data Governance (IDGov) provides the mechanisms through which IDSov is enacted, ensuring Indigenous Peoples lead decisions about how data are collected, accessed, and used. Our research investigates a local enactment of IDGov, discussing how custodial stewardship is enacted in data-sharing arrangements between an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled health organisation and a government birthing facility. The research aimed to understand Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander service users' and health workers' perspectives on how/whether to share data between services. Methods: Led by a community-controlled organisation, the study used Indigenous methodologies, including 'yarning'-a traditional knowledge-sharing practice. An Aboriginal researcher conducted yarns with Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander staff and perinatal service users. Collaborative analysis was undertaken using an adapted 'Thought Ritual', an Indigenous analytical framework. Findings: Analysis identified four domains: 1) Power and Control in Data Sharing-Data sharing can shift power dynamics, affecting sovereignty and community control, 2) Safety Concerns-Participants cited legal, cultural, and psychosocial risks tied to stigma and systemic racism, 3) Ability to Do My Job-Limited data access can hinder effective service delivery, and 4) Not Everything Should Be Shared-There is a clear preference for consent-based, selective data sharing. Interpretation: Honouring Indigenous perspectives in data-sharing arrangements is an ethical obligation. In perinatal settings, upholding custodial stewardship helps safeguard sovereignty, safety, and equitable outcomes. Funding: Funding was received from the Australian Government through the Medical Research Future Fund.
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.