Using Two-Eyed Seeing to Explore Interagency Collaboration

Envisioning Indigenous and biomedical healthcare collaboration at Stanton Territorial Hospital, Northwest Territories

Background: To improve the quality of care for Indigenous patients, local Indigenous leaders in the Northwest Territories, Canada have called for more culturally responsive models for Indigenous and biomedical healthcare collaboration at Stanton Territorial Hospital.Objective: This study examined how Indigenous patients and biomedical healthcare providers envision Indigenous healing practices working successfully with biomedical hospital care at Stanton Territorial Hospital.Methods: We carried out a qualitative study from May 2018 - June 2022. The study was overseen by an Indigenous Community Advisory Committee and was made up of two methods: (1) interviews (n = 41) with Indigenous Elders, patient advocates, and healthcare providers, and (2) sharing circles with four Indigenous Elders.Results: Participants' responses revealed three conceptual models for Indigenous and biomedical healthcare collaboration: the (1) integration; (2) independence; and (2) revisioning relationship models. In this article, we describe participants' proposed models and examine the extent to which each model is likely to improve care for Indigenous patients at Stanton Territorial Hospital. By surfacing new models for Indigenous and biomedical healthcare collaboration, the study findings deepen and extend understandings of hospital-based Indigenous wellness services and illuminate directions for future research.

Mapping the knowledge structure and trends in Australian Indigenous health and wellbeing research from 2003 to 2022: a scientometric analysis

The health and wellbeing of Australian Indigenous peoples is a nationally sanctioned priority, but despite this, few studies have comprehensively analyzed the features and characteristics of the research in the field. In this regard, a comprehensive scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping to systematically summarize and discuss the current state of research, research trends, and emerging areas of research were conducted. Original articles and reviews published between 2003 and 2022 were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection. CiteSpace and VOSviewer software were used to perform scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping. An examination of document and citation trends, authors, institutions, countries/regions, journals, and keywords was untaken, while co-citation, co-occurrence, and burst analysis provide insights and future development in this area. A total of 2,468 documents in this field were retrieved. A gradual increase in the number of documents over the past two decades is observed, with the number of documents doubling every ~7.5 years. Author Thompson SC and Charles Darwin University published the most documents, and 85.6% were affiliated with only Australian-based researchers. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health is the most prominent journal publishing in the field. The most commonly co-occurring keyword was "health," and the keyword "risk" had the longest citation burst. Five keyword clusters were identified; "cultural safety" was the largest. This study articulates the knowledge structure of the research, revealing a shift from population-level and data-driven studies to more applied research that informs Indigenous peoples health and wellbeing. Based on this review, we anticipate emergent research areas to (1) reflect a more comprehensive understanding of the multidimensional factors that shape Indigenous health and wellbeing; (2) move beyond a deficit-based perspective; (3) respect cultural protocols and protect the rights and privacy of Indigenous participants; (4) address racism and discrimination within the healthcare system; (5) foster respectful, equitable, and collaborative research practices with Indigenous peoples; (6) provide culturally appropriate and effective interventions for prevention, early intervention, and treatment; and (7) ensure equitable change in systems to enhance access, quality, and outcomes in health and wellbeing.

Characterization of industry relationships in oncology

BACKGROUND

Collaborative relationships between academic oncology and industry (pharmaceutical, biotechnology, "omic," and medical device companies) are essential for therapeutic development in oncology; however, limited research on engagement in and perceptions of these relationships has been done.

METHODS

Survey questions were developed to evaluate relationships between academic oncology and industry. An electronic survey was delivered to 1000 randomly selected members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, a professional organization for oncologists, eliciting respondents' views around oncology-industry collaborations. The responses were analyzed according to prespecified plans.

RESULTS

There were 225 survey respondents. Most were from the United States (70.0%), worked at an academic institution (60.1%), worked in medical oncology (81.2%), and had an active relationship with industry (85.8%). One quarter (26.7%) of respondents reported difficulty establishing a relationship with industry collaborators, and most respondents (75%) did not report having had mentorship in developing these relationships. The majority (85.3%) of respondents considered these collaborations important to their careers. Respondents generally thought that scientific integrity was preserved (92%), and most respondents (95%) had little concern over the quality of the collaborative product. Many (60%) shared concerns over potential conflict of interest if an individual with a compensated relationship promoted an industry product for clinical care/research, yet most respondents (67%) stated these relationships did not shape their interactions with patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides novel data characterizing the nature of collaborative relationships between clinicians, researchers, and industry in oncology. Although respondents considered these collaborations an important part of clinical and academic oncology, formal education or mentorship around these relationships was rare. Conflicting findings around conflict of interest highlight the importance of more dedicated research in this area.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Business enterprises in health care play a central role in cancer research and care, driving the development of new medical testing, drugs, and devices. Effective working relationships among clinicians, researchers, and these industry partners can promote innovative research and enhance patient care. Study of these collaborations has been limited to date. Through distribution of a questionnaire to cancer clinicians and researchers, we found that most participants consider these relationships valuable, though they find establishing such relationships challenging partly because of gaps in educational programs in this area. Our findings also highlight the need for further policy around the potential bias these relationships can introduce.

Integrating Indigenous healing practices within collaborative care models in primary healthcare in Canada: a rapid scoping review

OBJECTIVES

In November 2020, a series of reports, In Plain Sight, described widespread Indigenous-specific stereotyping, racism and discrimination limiting access to medical treatment and negatively impacting the health and wellness of Indigenous Peoples in British Columbia, Canada. To address the health inequalities experienced by Indigenous peoples, Indigenous healing practices must be integrated within the delivery of care. This rapid scoping review aimed to identify and synthesise strategies used to integrate Indigenous healing practices within collaborative care models available in community-based primary healthcare, delivered by regulated health professionals in Canada.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies conducted in community-based primary healthcare practices that used strategies to integrate Indigenous healing practices within collaborative care models.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Indigenous Studies Portal, Informit Indigenous Collection and Native Health Database for studies published from 2015 to 2021.

CHARTING METHODS

Our data extraction used three frameworks to categorise the findings. These frameworks defined elements of integrated healthcare (ie, functional, organisational, normative and professional), culturally appropriate primary healthcare and the extent of community engagement. We narratively summarised the included study characteristics.

RESULTS

We identified 2573 citations and included 31 in our review. Thirty-nine per cent of reported strategies used functional integration (n=12), 26% organisational (n=8), 19% normative (n=6) and 16% professional (n=5). Eighteen studies (58%) integrated all characteristics of culturally appropriate Indigenous healing practices into primary healthcare. Twenty-four studies (77%) involved Indigenous leadership or collaboration at each phase of the study and, seven (23%) included consultation only or the level of engagement was unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that collaborative and Indigenous-led strategies were more likely to facilitate and implement the integration of Indigenous healing practices. Commonalities across strategies included community engagement, elder support or Indigenous ceremony or traditions. However, we did not evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies.

How is Etuaptmumk/Two-Eyed Seeing characterized in Indigenous health research? A scoping review

Our scoping review sought to consider how Etuaptmumk or Two-Eyed Seeing is described in Indigenous health research and to compare descriptions of Two-Eyed Seeing between original authors (Elders Albert and Murdena Marshall, and Dr. Cheryl Bartlett) and new authors. Using the JBI scoping review methodology and qualitative thematic coding, we identified seven categories describing the meaning of Two-Eyed Seeing from 80 articles: guide for life, responsibility for the greater good and future generations, co-learning journey, multiple or diverse perspectives, spirit, decolonization and self-determination, and humans being part of ecosystems. We discuss inconsistencies between the original and new authors, important observations across the thematic categories, and our reflections from the review process. We intend to contribute to a wider dialogue about how Two-Eyed Seeing is understood in Indigenous health research and to encourage thoughtful and rich descriptions of the guiding principle.