In response to continuing legacies of colonialism, there is increasing recognition of the need to decolonise various fields of research and practice, including within work on violence against women and girls (VAWG). An emerging body of literature critiques how VAWG is framed, how prevention and response interventions may be imposed on communities as part of White Saviourism, and the existence of hierarchical approaches to data collection, analysis and interpretation. This scoping review is the first known attempt to describe global published and grey literature on colonialism and decolonisation within VAWG research and programming. We conducted an extensive search across databases and search engines including research studies, reports, commentaries and blogs, and identified 55 sources that focused on VAWG and related to the legacy of colonialism and/or decolonial approaches within the field. Included literature discussed the role of colonialism in shaping VAWG, referenced decolonial approaches to respond to VAWG and identified five key recommendations for VAWG research and practice: 1. Consider the context and power hierarchies within which VAWG occurs; 2. Incorporate community resources and perspectives into efforts to end VAWG; 3. Use methods and approaches to researching VAWG that centre perspectives and lived experience of communities; 4. Shift VAWG funding to local actors and ensure VAWG funding streams are more responsive to local needs and realities; and 5. Ensure local, contextually-relevant framings of feminisms inform decolonising of VAWG. We conclude that shifting towards a bottom-up approach to decolonising VAWG research and programming is essential to prevent decolonisation from being reduced to a buzzword. While literature explored the use of specific methods to decolonise research on VAWG, researchers need broader strategies to embed a decolonial perspective throughout the research process, transcending mere methodological adaptations. There is a need for VAWG research and programming to scrutinise structural inequities, particularly acknowledging how colonial practices entrenched within wider societal power structures impact the field of VAWG.

Recent research has highlighted the impacts of colonialism and racism in global health, yet few studies have presented concrete steps toward addressing the problems. We conducted a narrative review to identify published evidence that documented guiding frameworks for enhancing equity and inclusion in global health research and practice (GHRP). Based on this narrative review, we developed a questionnaire with a series of reflection questions related on commonly reported challenges related to diversity, inclusion, equity, and power imbalances. To reach consensus on a set of priority questions relevant to each theme, the questionnaire was sent to a sample of 18 global health experts virtually and two rounds of iterations were conducted. Results identified eight thematic areas and 19 reflective questions that can assist global health researchers and practitioners striving to implement socially just global health reforms. Key elements identified for improving GHRP include: (1) aiming to understand the historical context and power dynamics within the areas touched by the program; (2) promoting and mobilizing local stakeholders and leadership and ensuring measures for their participation in decision-making; (3) ensuring that knowledge products are co-produced and more equitably accessible; (4) establishing a more holistic feedback and accountability system to understand needed reforms based on local perspectives; and (5) applying systems thinking to addressing challenges and encouraging approaches that can be sustained long-term. GHRP professionals should reflect more deeply on how their goals align with those of their in-country collaborators. The consistent application of reflective processes has the potential to shift GHRP towards increased equity.

Using an adaptation of the PRISMA checklist, this interdisciplinary systematic literary review synthesizes forty peer-reviewed research papers and neuropsychological theoretical publications about the bilingual cognitive advantage debate. The objectives of this study were to (1) analyze the neurocognitive and methodological discussion behind bilingualism studies, and (2) explore how a better understanding of cultural context and colonialism can help contribute to the bilingual cognitive advantage debate. Research with quantitative and qualitative designs were considered, as long as they studied the bilingual population (regardless of what languages the participants knew or their age). Although most papers were from the field of cognitive neurosciences, articles from different scientific disciplines were considered for analysis. Results showed that there doesn\'t appear to be a consensus on bilinguals holding a significant cognitive advantage over monolinguals, yet some studies found that bilinguals had higher scores in inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility. While bilinguals show an increase in grey matter and activity in areas of the frontal lobe, the precise mechanisms of control between languages have yet to be identified. However, most of these studies did not have diverse samples and showed methodological discrepancies when measuring bilingualism. Although heritage language of immigrated people is a known factor in this area of study, linguistic cultural sensibilities of colonized lands haven\'t been properly assessed in the cognitive advantage debate. Based on these findings, a research proposal and scale regarding executive functioning and the perceptions of Puerto Rican bilingualism are in development.

Indigenous education curriculum has been implemented in health professional programs as a potential solution to addressing commonly held false beliefs, as well as negative social attitudes and behaviours. As such it is important to map and analyze the current literature on educational initiatives that teach about historical and ongoing colonialism as a determinant of health to identify commonly used theoretical frameworks and outcomes assessed, as well as the intended and unintended short- and long-term outcomes on health professional learner\'s beliefs, attitudes and behaviours. This scoping review follows the framework by (Peters et al., JBI Evidence Synthesis 18:2119-2126, 2020). Six databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Sociological Abstracts, ERIC, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses) were searched with grey literature included through hand-searching of Indigenous journals and citation searching for papers published up until 2022 based on an established search criterion. Two reviewers independently screened articles. In total, 2731 records were identified and screened; full text was assessed for 72 articles; 14 articles were identified as meeting all the inclusion criteria and included in the final review. Commonly- used theoretical frameworks were transformative learning and cultural safety, with a variety of evaluation tools used and post-intervention outcomes measured across the studies (e.g., knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, behaviour and general learner feedback). Indigenous education interventions require longitudinal evaluation studies to address shortcomings in the design and evaluation of outcomes associated with teaching about colonialism as a structural determinant of health. It is critical that we identify and monitor the intended and unintended consequences of such curriculum as we look to develop solutions to changing health professional learners\' false beliefs and attitudes, in hopes to inform their future care practices.

BACKGROUND: As researchers and implementors begin to acknowledge the repercussions of institutionalized colonialism on community and individual health, the need to decolonize research has become clear. Despite this, there is neither a singular definition of decolonizing methodologies nor an overview of the shared principles and characteristics of decolonized research needed to codify this work as common practice in global health.
OBJECTIVE: The review will identify papers that reference principles of decolonization and identify shared characteristics between them. The aim of this scoping review is to review decolonized research methodologies through the lens of sexual health as a step in creating a shared understanding of best practices. We will further examine the tools and methods used to collect and analyze data within the included studies.
METHODS: The protocol for this scoping review was developed using the framework from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews). The search strategy will comprise a search of electronic databases (JSTOR, Embase, EMCare, MEDLINE [Ovid], Global Health Database, Web of Science), gray literature sources, and key studies. Titles and abstracts will be reviewed by 2 or more independent reviewers against inclusion criteria. Bibliometric details, study design, methodology, community involvement, and other indicators will be collected using a data extraction tool developed for this review. Extracted data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis of content and themes to identify common practices in decolonized methodologies within sexual health. Narrative summaries will be used to describe results in relation to the research question, and identified gaps will be discussed.
RESULTS: The initial title or abstract review of 4967 studies identified by the search strategy was completed in November 2022. In total, 1777 studies met initial inclusion criteria and were sent to a second round of title or abstract review, which was completed in January 2023. In total, 706 studies were downloaded for full-text inclusion, which is expected to be completed by April 2023. We aim to complete data extraction and analysis by May 2023 and expect to publish the findings by the end of July 2023.
CONCLUSIONS: There remains a gap in the research on the meaning and application of decolonized research strategies, particularly within sexual and reproductive health. The findings of this study will contribute to a shared definition of decolonized methodologies and how they can be applied as a common practice in global health research. Applications include the development of decolonized frameworks, theoretical discourses, and methodologies. The study will inform the design and implementation of future decolonized research and evaluation strategies, particularly around sexual and reproductive health.
UNASSIGNED: DERR1-10.2196/45771.

In many settler-colonial countries, Indigenous people do not access disability services at rates commensurate with disability prevalence. Existing research suggests that services often do not reflect Indigenous values and social practices, impacting on accessibility. Furthermore, disability services have historically been implicated in processes of colonisation. There is an urgent need to decolonise disability services. Understanding Indigenous knowledge and experience of disability is a necessary step towards achieving this. We systematically reviewed the disability conceptualisations, practices and experiences of First Nations peoples of Australia. Twelve studies met inclusion criteria. There was a consensus among these studies that Western constructs of disability do not resonate with many First Nations people across Australia. The studies reported that many First Nations people conceptualise most disabilities as unremarkable conditions that reflect the normal range of human diversity, although some conditions may be associated with social stigma. Inclusive attitudes and practices of caregiving in First Nations families facilitate the participation of First Nations people with disabilities in family and community life. However, ableism and racism in broader society combine to exclude many First Nations peoples with disabilities from public spaces and from labour markets. Disability services regularly fail to reflect First Nations values and social practices, and can lead to further disempowerment and marginalisation due to diagnostic processes; displacement from country and communities; gendered discrimination; and poor relationships with service providers. We argue that intersectional experiences of colonialism, racism, ableism and sexism, particularly in disability services, can lead to the marginalisation of First Nations participants and families. The decolonisation of disability services requires services to embrace diverse First Nations values and practices associated with human capability, social participation and caregiving. Decolonising disability services also necessitates First Nations control of the governance of disability services and reform across service, organisational, systemic and conceptual levels.

Background. Calls to Action outlined by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) necessitate critical reflection and urgent action to improve occupational therapy with Indigenous Peoples in Canada. Purpose. This scoping review aims to synthesize the literature related to Indigenous Peoples and occupational therapy practice, research, and education in Canada, and appraise empirical research using adapted Indigenous Health Research criteria. Method. A scoping review was conducted across published academic and grey literature with additional appraisal of empirical studies. Findings. A total of 6 themes emerged from 47 articles spanning from 1970 to 2020: recognizing colonial history, responding to the TRC, participating in personal and professional reflection, identifying Western ideologies, engaging in partnership in practice, and recognizing social and systemic barriers. Empirical studies met appraisal criteria inconsistently. Implications. To meaningfully engage in reconciliation, the profession of occupational therapy must generate Indigenous-led and relevant research, critically transform curricula, and address tensions between themes in practice.

Gastric cancer is a worldwide concern, particularly for Indigenous populations who face greater disparities in healthcare. With decreased access to screening and critical treatment delays, this group is experiencing adverse health effects. To determine what factors drive these disparities, a systematic review was performed in PubMed. This revealed a lack of research on gastric cancer specific to this population. The literature primarily focused on subset analyses and biological aspects with sparse focus on determinants of health. The results informed this presentation on factors related to Indigenous gastric cancer, which are influenced by colonialism. Indigenous populations encounter high rates of food shortage, exposure to harmful environmental agents, structural racism in the built environment, H. pylori, and compromised healthcare quality as an effect of colonialism, which all contribute to the gastric cancer burden. Putting gastric cancer into a cultural context is a potential means to respond to colonial perspectives and their negative impact on Indigenous patients. The objective of this manuscript is to examine the current state of gastric cancer literature from a global perspective, describe what is currently known based on this literature review, supplemented with additional resources due to lack of published works in PubMed, and to present a model of gastric cancer through the lens of a modified medicine wheel as a potential tool to counter colonial healthcare perspectives and to honor Indigenous culture.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Indigenous peoples are at elevated risk of exposure to trauma and related mental and physical health difficulties that are rooted in the ongoing experience of settler-colonialism. Historical and current trauma exposure feed intergenerational cycles that compromise the healthy development of Indigenous children.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of trauma-focused, caregiver-child interventions adapted for Indigenous communities.
RESULTS: We identified 13 articles each reporting a unique intervention. Six were implemented among American Indians, five among Indigenous Australians, one among First Nations and Metis peoples, and one among Māori peoples. Eight of the interventions used surface-structure cultural adaptations (i.e., replacing images or examples for greater cultural relevance), one used deep-structure cultural adaptations (i.e., replacing curriculum for greater cultural relevance), and four were culturally grounded interventions (i.e., developed by the Indigenous community in partnership with researchers).
CONCLUSIONS: The overall limited number of trauma-focused, caregiver-child interventions for Indigenous communities, and especially those representing reciprocal collaboration between researchers and the communities with whom they engage, is notable. We argue that such collaboration is critical to healing Indigenous traumatization from colonization and provide recommendations for future trauma intervention science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).