Reclaiming Indigenous Birth

Research Question

What is the evidence about Indigenous midwifery models of care that are led by, and designed for, Indigenous people in Canada?

Indigenous Midwifery Models in Research

To enable other researchers studying issues related to Indigenous midwifery, we conducted a scoping review of the research available. The method is described below the table. Currently, only studies published about midwifery models of care in Canada have been included. Check back as we continue to add studies from US, Australia, and New Zealand.

Participants

The participants in this review are Indigenous people who provide midwifery care and Indigenous clients or patients who give birth. Indigenous people around the world have distinct social, cultural, economic and political characteristics and share a common experience that their ways of life are different from dominant societies where they live. The term Indigenous recognizes the rights-based principles of self-identification of the Indigenous nation, collective, community, culture or group. In Canada, Indigenous peoples identify as First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples. Recognizing that not all Indigenous people identify with these terms, our search accounted for diverse terminology that Indigenous populations use to describe themselves. We included Indigenous women and gender diverse Indigenous people who give birth. All ages among people giving birth were included.

Concept

We examined midwifery models of care that are led by, and designed for, Indigenous people. We defined a midwifery model of care as a practice that includes one or more midwives who deliver care to people in pregnancy, birth, and the postnatal period. We excluded studies that did not incorporate the experiences and knowledge of midwives. This review also excluded studies that only reported on nurses or other healthcare providers’ perspectives on midwifery models of care.

Context

Studies that were conducted in Canada were included as we are interested in Canada’s unique history, policies, and socio-economic conditions and how these factors intersect, and shape midwifery models of care provided to Indigenous populations.

A review of studies in US, Australia and New Zealand is forthcoming. These countries will be included due to their similar socioeconomic, political, colonial and historical contexts. These countries, including Canada, are industrialized, capitalistic, and democratic and share in a history of direct, settler colonization by the British Empire.

Types of Sources

This review included the following documents: peer-reviewed articles published in English at any time period up to the data of the search; any empirical and theoretical studies; all qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research studies, including literature reviews, systematic reviews (with or without meta-analysis), scoping reviews, interviews, and focus groups.

Search strategy

Through consultation with a librarian, a search strategy of the following electronic databases was conducted: Ovid Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Informit, EBSCO Academic Search Complete, Scopus, and PubMed. An additional grey literature search was implemented in Google and Google Scholar. The references of included articles were hand-searched. Data sources were searched up to March 2025.

Key Words: Midwifery, community health services, indigenous health services, women’s health services, models of care

References

  1. Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C., & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), 2119-2126. doi.org:10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
  2. Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., Godfrey, C. M., Macdonald, M. T., Langlois, E. V., Soares-Weiser, K., Moriarty, J., Clifford, T., Tunçalp, Ö., & Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467-473. doi:10.7326/M18-0850
Scroll to Top