Suchergebnisse

Background - Globally, there is a huge lack of relevant research about widespread lifestyle diseases and living conditions in indigenous communities. Northern and Middle Norway have a history of multiple ethnic groups and the Sami has been acknowledged as the indigenous people of Norway by the Norwegian State. The SAMINOR 2 Clinical Survey, a part of the SAMINOR Study, was carried out to provide health information about the Sami population in Norway. Methods - The cross-sectional population-based SAMINOR 2 Clinical Survey consists of both questionnaires and a clinical examination performed in 10 municipalities during 2012–2014. Results - In total, 6004 men and women (participation rate 48%) aged 40–79 years took part in this study. In inland Finnmark, the Sami are in the majority (80–90%) as opposed to the coastline of Troms and Nordland, where the Sami population form a minority (20%). More women than men participated (54% versus 43%, respectively). Obesity was prevalent in this sample and a high mean glycated haemoglobin was observed. Conclusions - This article describes the methods and data collection of the SAMINOR 2 Clinical Survey and presents some characteristics of the sample. The definition of ethnic groups is a core question in the survey and includes several criteria. To ensure that indigenous values and priorities are reflected in the research themes, we recommend that future research projects be directed in close collaboration with the Sami Parliament and the local communities.

This paper describes the extent and variation in health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people within Alaska, Greenland and the northern regions of Canada, Russia and the Nordic countries. We accessed official health statistics and reviewed research studies. We selected a few indicators of health status, health determinants and health care to demonstrate the health disparities that exist. For a large number of health indicators Indigenous people fare worse than non-Indigenous people in the same region or nationally, with the exception of the Sami in the Nordic countries whose health profiles are similar to their non-Sami neighbours. That we were unable to produce a uniform set of indicators applicable to all regions is indicative of the large knowledge gaps that exist. The need for ongoing health monitoring for Indigenous people is most acute for the Sami and Russia, less so for Canada, and least for Alaska, where health data specific to Alaska Natives are generally available. It is difficult to produce an overarching explanatory model for health disparities that is applicable to all regions. We need to seek explanation in the broader political, cultural and societal contexts within which Indigenous people live in their respective regions.

This paper describes the extent and variation in health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people within Alaska, Greenland and the northern regions of Canada, Russia and the Nordic countries. We accessed official health statistics and reviewed research studies. We selected a few indicators of health status, health determinants and health care to demonstrate the health disparities that exist. For a large number of health indicators Indigenous people fare worse than non-Indigenous people in the same region or nationally, with the exception of the Sami in the Nordic countries whose health profiles are similar to their non-Sami neighbours. That we were unable to produce a uniform set of indicators applicable to all regions is indicative of the large knowledge gaps that exist. The need for ongoing health monitoring for Indigenous people is most acute for the Sami and Russia, less so for Canada, and least for Alaska, where health data specific to Alaska Natives are generally available. It is difficult to produce an overarching explanatory model for health disparities that is applicable to all regions. We need to seek explanation in the broader political, cultural and societal contexts within which Indigenous people live in their respective regions.

Background International studies of the health of Indigenous and tribal peoples provide important public health insights. Reliable data are required for the development of policy and health services. Previous studies document poorer outcomes for Indigenous peoples compared with benchmark populations, but have been restricted in their coverage of countries or the range of health indicators. Our objective is to describe the health and social status of Indigenous and tribal peoples relative to benchmark populations from a sample of countries. Methods Collaborators with expertise in Indigenous health data systems were identified for each country. Data were obtained for population, life expectancy at birth, infant mortality, low and high birthweight, maternal mortality, nutritional status, educational attainment, and economic status. Data sources consisted of governmental data, data from non-governmental organisations such as UNICEF, and other research. Absolute and relative differences were calculated. Findings Our data (23 countries, 28 populations) provide evidence of poorer health and social outcomes for Indigenous peoples than for non-Indigenous populations. However, this is not uniformly the case, and the size of the rate difference varies. We document poorer outcomes for Indigenous populations for: life expectancy at birth for 16 of 18 populations with a difference greater than 1 year in 15 populations; infant mortality rate for 18 of 19 populations with a rate difference greater than one per 1000 livebirths in 16 populations; maternal mortality in ten populations; low birthweight with the rate difference greater than 2% in three populations; high birthweight with the rate difference greater than 2% in one population; child malnutrition for ten of 16 populations with a difference greater than 10% in five populations; child obesity for eight of 12 populations with a difference greater than 5% in four populations; adult obesity for seven of 13 populations with a difference greater than 10% in four populations; educational attainment for 26 of 27 populations with a difference greater than 1% in 24 populations; and economic status for 15 of 18 populations with a difference greater than 1% in 14 populations. Interpretation We systematically collated data across a broader sample of countries and indicators than done in previous studies. Taking into account the UN Sustainable Development Goals, we recommend that national governments develop targeted policy responses to Indigenous health, improving access to health services, and Indigenous data within national surveillance systems.