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)

Two-eyed seeing is a guiding framework for research that values and uses Indigenous and Western ways of knowing. In this article, we describe the merits and challenges of using two-eyed seeing to guide a collaborative research project with a First Nation community in Manitoba, Canada devastated by a human-made flood. In 2011, provincial government officials flooded 17 First Nation communities including Little Saskatchewan First Nation (LSFN), displacing thousands of people. To date, approximately 350 LSFN’s on-reserve members remain displaced. Two-eyed seeing ensured that the study was community-driven and facilitated a more thorough analysis of the data. This case study illuminated the absence of two-eyed seeing in policy making and decision making. We argue for the need to incorporate two-eyed seeing in policy making and program development, and to value and foster Indigenous perspectives in decision making within communities, especially regarding activities that have a direct impact on environments within or surrounding Indigenous lands.

Background. Among circumpolar populations, recent research has documented a significant increase in risk factors which are commonly associated with chronic disease, notably obesity. Objective. The present study undertakes a scoping review of research on obesity in the circumpolar Inuit to determine the extent obesity research has been undertaken, how well all subpopulations and geographic areas are represented, the methodologies used and whether they are sufficient in describing risk factors, and the prevalence and health outcomes associated with obesity. Design. Online databases were used to identify papers published 1992-2011, from which we selected 38 publications from Canada, the United States, and Greenland that used obesity as a primary or secondary outcome variable in 30 or more non-pregnant Inuit (‘‘Eskimo’’) participants aged 2 years or older. Results. The majority of publications (92%) reported cross-sectional studies while 8% examined retrospective cohorts. All but one of the studies collected measured data. Overall 84% of the publications examined obesity in adults. Those examining obesity in children focused on early childhood or adolescence. While most (66%) reported 1 or more anthropometric indices, none incorporated direct measures of adiposity. Evaluated using a customized quality assessment instrument, 26% of studies achieved an ‘‘A’’ quality ranking, while 18 and 39% achieved quality rankings of ‘‘B’’ and ‘‘C’’, respectively. Conclusions. While the quality of studies is generally high, research on obesity among Inuit would benefit from careful selection of methods and reference standards, direct measures of adiposity in adults and children, studies of preadolescent children, and prospective cohort studies linking early childhood exposures with obesity outcomes throughout childhood and adolescence. Keywords: health; Aboriginal; north; overweight; adult; child; systematic; Canada, Greenland, Alaska (Published: 4 July 2012) Citation: Int J Circumpolar Health 2012, 71: 18698 - http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/ijch.v71i0.18698

The Colorado School of Public Health is at the forefront of collaborative public health education, research and service.

Background: Indigenous Peoples are impacted by industrial resource development that takes place on, or near, their communities. Existing literature on impacts of industrial resource development on Indigenous Peoples primarily focus on physical health outcomes and rarely focus on the mental health impacts. To understand the full range of long-term and anticipated health impacts of industrial resource development on Indigenous communities, mental health impacts must be examined. It is well-established that there is a connection between the environment and Indigenous wellbeing, across interrelated dimensions of mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual health.Methods: This paper identifies how the Community Advisory Team and a team of Indigenous and settler scholars will conduct the review. The literature search will use the OVID interface to search Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Global Health databases. Non-indexed peer-reviewed journals related to Indigenous health or research will be scanned. Books and book chapters will be identified in the Scopus and PsycINFO databases. The grey literature search will also include Google and be limited to reports published by government, academic, and non-profit organizations. Reference lists of key publications will be checked for additional relevant publications, including theses, dissertations, reports, and other articles not retrieved in the online searches. Additional sources may be recommended by team members. Included documents will focus on Indigenous Peoples in North America, South America, Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, and Circumpolar regions, research that reports on mental health, and research that is based on land loss connected to dams, mines, agriculture, or petroleum development. Literature that meets the inclusion criteria will be screened at the title/abstract and full-text stages by two team members in Covidence. The included literature will be rated with a quality appraisal tool and information will be extracted by two team members; a consensus of information will be reached and be submitted for analysis.Discussion: The synthesized evidence from this review is relevant for land use policy, health impact assessments, economic development, mental health service planning, and communities engaging in development projects.Systematic review registration: Registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; Registration numberCRD42021253720)