Elevating the uses of storytelling approaches within Indigenous health research: a critical and participatory scoping review protocol involving Indigenous people and settlers.

BACKGROUND: There is a complicated and exploitative history of research with Indigenous peoples and accompanying calls to meaningfully and respectfully include Indigenous knowledge in healthcare. Storytelling approaches that privilege Indigenous voices can be a useful tool to break the hold that Western worldviews have within the research. Our collaborative team of Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers, and Indigenous patients, Elders, healthcare providers, and administrators, will conduct a critical participatory, scoping review to identify and examine how storytelling has been used as a method in Indigenous health research. METHODS: Guided by two-eyed seeing, we will use Bassett and McGibbon's adaption of Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology. Relevant articles will be identified through a systematic search of the gray literature, core Indigenous health journals, and online databases including Scopus, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AgeLine, Academic Search Complete, Bibliography of Native North Americans, Canadian Reference Centre, and PsycINFO. Qualitative and mixed-methods research articles will be included if the researchers involved Indigenous participants or their healthcare professionals living in Turtle Island (i.e., Canada and the USA), Australia, or Aotearoa (New Zealand); use storytelling as a research method; focus on healthcare phenomena; and are written in English. Two reviewers will independently screen titles/abstracts and full-text articles. We will extract data, identify the array of storytelling approaches, and critically examine how storytelling was valued and used. An intensive collaboration will be woven throughout all review stages as academic researchers co-create this work with Indigenous patients, Elders, healthcare professionals, and administrators. Participatory strategies will include four relational gatherings throughout the project. Based on our findings, we will co-create a framework to guide the respectful use of storytelling as a method in Indigenous health research involving Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. DISCUSSION: This work will enable us to elucidate the extent, range, and nature of storytelling within Indigenous health research, to critically reflect on how it has been and could be used, and to develop guidance for the respectful use of this method within research that involves Indigenous peoples and settlers. Our findings will enable the advancement of storytelling methods which meaningfully include Indigenous perspectives, practices, and priorities to benefit the health and wellbeing of Indigenous communities. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/rvf7q ).

Cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis and outcomes among Manitoba First Nations people living on and off reserve: a retrospective population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Substantial cancer-related disparities exist between First Nations and non-Indigenous Canadians. The objectives of this study were to compare cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis and mortality outcomes between Status First Nations people living on reserve and off reserve in Manitoba. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of population-level administrative health databases in Manitoba. Cancers diagnosed between Apr. 1, 2004, and Mar. 31, 2011, were linked with the Indian Registry System and 5 provincial databases. We compared differences in baseline characteristics, cancer incidence, site and stage at diagnosis between Status First Nations patients living on and off reserve. Linear regression models examined trends in annual cancer incidence. Cox proportional hazard regression models examined mortality. RESULTS: There were 1524 newly diagnosed cancers among Status First Nations people in Manitoba between Apr. 1, 2004, and Mar. 31, 2011. First Nations people living on reserve were significantly older than those living off reserve (p < 0.001) and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores at diagnosis (p = 0.01). A lower proportion of on-reserve patients than off-reserve patients were diagnosed with stage I cancers (21.7% v. 26.9%, p = 0.02). There were no differences in annual cancer incidence between groups. The adjusted incidence of cancer over the combined study years was higher in the off-reserve group than in the on-reserve group (287.9 v. 247.9 per 100 000, p = 0.02). No significant differences in mortality were found. INTERPRETATION: The lower proportion of on-reserve patients diagnosed with cancer at stage I is concerning, as it suggests less access to screening services or delays in diagnosis. Further research is needed to understand patterns in diagnosis and differences in cancer site and overall cancer incidence between First Nations people living on and off reserve.

Comparing cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis and outcomes of First Nations and all other Manitobans: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Globally, epidemiological evidence suggests cancer incidence and outcomes among Indigenous peoples are a growing concern. Although historically cancer among First Nations (FN) peoples in Canada was relatively unknown, recent epidemiological evidence reveals a widening of cancer related disparities. However evidence at the population level is limited. The aim of this study was to explore cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis, and outcomes among status FN peoples in comparison with all other Manitobans (AOM). METHODS: All cancers diagnosed between April 1, 2004 and March 31, 2011 were linked with the Indian Registry System and five provincial healthcare databases to compare differences in characteristics, cancer incidence, and stage at diagnosis and mortality of the FN and AOM cohorts. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to examine mortality. RESULTS: The FN cohort was significantly younger, with higher comorbidities than AOM. A higher proportion of FN people were diagnosed with cancer at stages III (18.7% vs. 15.4%) and IV (22.4% vs. 19.9%). Cancer incidence was significantly lower in the FN cohort, however, there were no significant differences between the two cohorts after adjusting for age, sex, income and area of residence. No significant trends in cancer incidence were identified in either cohort over time. Mortality was generally higher in the FN cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar cancer incidence, FN peoples in Manitoba experience poorer survival. The underlying causes of these disparities are not yet understood, particularly in relation to the impact of colonization and other determinants of health.