Claims

Evaluation of cultural safety training interventions was inconsistent: 46% of papers evaluated programs, methods varied widely, post-surveys were most common, and only half stated evaluation limitations

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · review r2–r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Nearly one-third of selected papers (n = 61; 46%) described an evaluation of a cultural safety training intervention, with varied objectives including learner experiences (31%), learning outcomes and barriers (26%), and new skills/behaviours (25%). → MacLean Tammy L. 2023 q3 i? Just over half of evaluation articles used both qualitative and quantitative methodologies (n = 32; 52%), and post-surveys were the most common data collection method, mentioned by two-thirds of relevant articles. → MacLean Tammy L. 2023 (2) q3 i? Only approximately half of the papers describing a training intervention presented the limitations of the chosen evaluation methods (n = 33; 54%). → MacLean Tammy L. 2023 (3)

Evidence

MacLean Tammy L. 2023

MacLean Tammy L., Qiang Jinfan Rose, Henderson Lynn, Bowra Andrea, Howard Lisa, Pringle Victoria, Butsang Tenzin, Rice Emma, Di Ruggiero Erica, Mashford-Pringle Angela. (2023). Indigenous Cultural Safety Training for Applied Health, Social Work, and Education Professionals: A PRISMA Scoping Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065217

q3 · i? · review · r3

Frequency analysis of evaluation presence and focus across the 134 included papers. The review reports n = 61 (46%) described an evaluation, with the largest proportion (n = 19; 31%) aimed at understanding learners' general experiences, perceptions, needs, and/or preferences.

"Nearly one-third of papers selected for this review described an evaluation of an Indigenous cultural safety training intervention (n = 61; 46%)."

MacLean Tammy L. 2023 (2)

MacLean Tammy L., Qiang Jinfan Rose, Henderson Lynn, Bowra Andrea, Howard Lisa, Pringle Victoria, Butsang Tenzin, Rice Emma, Di Ruggiero Erica, Mashford-Pringle Angela. (2023). Indigenous Cultural Safety Training for Applied Health, Social Work, and Education Professionals: A PRISMA Scoping Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065217

q3 · i? · review · r2

Frequency analysis of evaluation methodologies. The review reports mixed methods in n = 32 (52%), qualitative only in n = 20 (33%), quantitative only in n = 9 (15%), with post-surveys the most common collection method (two-thirds of relevant articles) and pre- and post-surveys the most common overall approach.

"just over half of relevant articles described utilizing both qualitative and quantitative methodologies (n = 32; 52%)."

MacLean Tammy L. 2023 (3)

MacLean Tammy L., Qiang Jinfan Rose, Henderson Lynn, Bowra Andrea, Howard Lisa, Pringle Victoria, Butsang Tenzin, Rice Emma, Di Ruggiero Erica, Mashford-Pringle Angela. (2023). Indigenous Cultural Safety Training for Applied Health, Social Work, and Education Professionals: A PRISMA Scoping Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065217

q3 · i? · review · r2

Frequency analysis of stated evaluation limitations among papers describing a training intervention. The review reports only n = 33 (54%) presented the limitations of their chosen evaluation methods.

"only approximately half of these papers presented the limitations of the methods chosen for the intervention evaluations (n = 33; 54%)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.