Article type
Abstract
Background
In systematic reviews, we rarely consider whether the people who are in trials had any opportunity to govern the collection, management, access, interpretation, dissemination, and reuse of their data. This is especially relevant when evidence-based guidelines are developed about the people who have historically had research done on them rather than with them. This presentation provides insight into a growing global movement of people, particularly Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, taking ownership of the data about them.
Objectives
To discuss Indigenous data sovereignty and governance and how these principles could be considered when developing and writing systematic reviews. These principles have yet to be discussed within the context of systematic reviews; therefore, this presentation provides background and discussion about why it may be important to consider moving forward.
Conclusions
Data sovereignty and governance need to be considered before equity; however, they have also been developed in response to equity. Although these principles are fundamental to the data collection within randomized controlled trials, systematic reviewers tend to not consider whether these principles have been considered beyond these trials. Consideration of data sovereignty and whether it has a place in systematic reviews is worth exploring.
In systematic reviews, we rarely consider whether the people who are in trials had any opportunity to govern the collection, management, access, interpretation, dissemination, and reuse of their data. This is especially relevant when evidence-based guidelines are developed about the people who have historically had research done on them rather than with them. This presentation provides insight into a growing global movement of people, particularly Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, taking ownership of the data about them.
Objectives
To discuss Indigenous data sovereignty and governance and how these principles could be considered when developing and writing systematic reviews. These principles have yet to be discussed within the context of systematic reviews; therefore, this presentation provides background and discussion about why it may be important to consider moving forward.
Conclusions
Data sovereignty and governance need to be considered before equity; however, they have also been developed in response to equity. Although these principles are fundamental to the data collection within randomized controlled trials, systematic reviewers tend to not consider whether these principles have been considered beyond these trials. Consideration of data sovereignty and whether it has a place in systematic reviews is worth exploring.