Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Health effects of Indigenous language use and revitalization: a realist review

International Journal for Equity in Health volume 21, Article number: 169 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Indigenous populations across the world are more likely to suffer from poor health outcomes when compared to other racial and ethnic groups. Although these disparities have many sources, one protective factor that has become increasingly apparent is the continued use and/or revitalization of traditional Indigenous lifeways: Indigenous language in particular. This realist review is aimed at bringing together the literature that addresses effects of language use and revitalization on mental and physical health.

Methods

Purposive bibliographic searches on Scopus were conducted to identify relevant publications, further augmented by forward citation chaining. Included publications (qualitative and quantitative) described health outcomes for groups of Indigenous people who either did or did not learn and/or use their ancestral language. The geographical area studied was restricted to the Americas, Australia or New Zealand. Publications that were not written in English, Spanish, French, Portuguese or German were excluded. A realist approach was followed to identify positive, neutral or negative effects of language use and/or acquisition on health, with both qualitative and quantitative measures considered.

Results

The bibliographic search yielded a total of 3508 possible publications of which 130 publications were included in the realist analysis. The largest proportion of the outcomes addressed in the studies (62.1%) reported positive effects. Neutral outcomes accounted for 16.6% of the reported effects. Negative effects (21.4%) were often qualified by such issues as possible cultural use of tobacco, testing educational outcomes in a student’s second language, and correlation with socioeconomic status (SES), health access, or social determinants of health; it is of note that the positive correlations with language use just as frequently occurred with these issues as the negative correlations did.

Conclusions

Language use and revitalization emerge as protective factors in the health of Indigenous populations. Benefits of language programs in tribal and other settings should be considered a cost-effective way of improving outcomes in multiple domains.

Background

Since the start of settler colonization, IndigenousFootnote 1 languages have been declining in use and number of speakers. Acts of genocide, ethnocide, and assimilation play roles in this decline, including recent examples to limit Indigenous language use through policy (e.g., [1, 2]) or by adoption (forced or voluntary) of a regionally dominant language [3]. Many groups have reacted to this loss by engaging in a variety of language revitalization techniques, ranging from pairing younger learners with elder speakers (“master/apprentice programs” [4]) to recreation of languages without current speakers based on archival material [5]. Those latter efforts have led to a shift from calling languages “dead” to “sleeping” [6, 7]. If a language is facing decline or in need of revitalization, the task to revitalize is quite challenging [8, 9].

Despite the challenges facing revitalization, an ever-increasing number of Indigenous communities throughout the world are engaging in that work. The most commonly cited example of successful revitalization is that of Hebrew [10, 11], but other major efforts have been found for Welsh [12], Māori [13] and Hawaiian [14]. Such efforts are directed toward increasing the use of the language, but the efforts also serve one or more of several larger goals: sovereignty, cultural reclamation, community cohesion, identity, and cultural knowledge transmission (e.g., [15]). Indeed, although higher levels of proficiency and broader community use are often taken as the hallmarks of success, these will not be the goals of every revitalization program, and therefore other vitality models based on more realistic community goals are largely absent and urgently needed. In the current realist review, revitalization was understood as language use defined by the community without regard for proficiency level.

One somewhat unexpected benefit attributed to such programs is an improvement in health. As outlined in our previous adventitious survey [16], language maintenance or revitalization has been found to have health benefits for a broad range of issues, such as suicide, obesity, diabetes, and educational performance. The present realist review updates and expands that work. Several years have passed since that review, and as could be expected, additional relevant results have been published. While the 2016 paper excluded mental health studies, those will be included in this review in order to give a fuller picture of health outcomes.

The realist review methodology [17,18,19] is an appropriate format for this topic: The results are scattered across publications and address many health issues, and there are too few that address a single health issue to justify a systematic review. The realist review process is similar to systematic and scoping reviews but allows flexibility of the search guidelines to best obtain manuscripts for this search. It is an appropriate technique for studying emerging issues which are not well covered by individual search terms. This approach uses database searches coupled with citation chaining, allowing for discovery of studies that are related to the cited articles even if they do not share any discoverable search terms.

Our hypothesis was that language use or revitalization will improve health on a wide range of measures. The mechanism is unlikely to be evident in the sparse literature that exists, but plausible candidates are increased social connections, increased sense of belonging and purpose, return to traditional food, and increased physical activity related to traditional activities. Further, Indigenous cultures, and therefore languages, have inherent health and well-being promoting principles that have co-evolved with natural environments for thousands of years [20]. From principles of traditional ecological knowledge to traditional healing methodologies, Indigenous language is the vessel that most efficiently carries these cultural lifeways. Further, Indigenous languages carry values that are health-promoting, including traditional foods practices and consumption, activities (exercise) to participate in, community relationship, and spiritual practices; these all relate to positive health outcomes. While mechanisms of health promotion will not be the focus of this study, future studies should work to collaborate with Indigenous culture keepers to learn about these mechanisms.

Articles available in searchable databases will largely use western definitions of health, but Indigenous definitions of health can vary by tribal community [21,22,23,24,25]. Although definitions vary across tribes, many Indigenous communities consider several aspects of health such as physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual as commonly seen in the medicine wheel [26]. Other critical aspects of health include, but are not limited to, community and social connections, tribal and cultural connection, connection to land and traditional lifeways, as well as resilience in the face of stress, oppression and discrimination [25, 27, 28]. Western reports, on the other hand, are often focused on specific illness and diseases and negative conditions that would present for treatment in western, clinical settings. Even data that fit such definitions may have different cultural implications, such as tribal acceptance of teenage pregnancy as “as an expectable life event rather than as a social problem to be eradicated” ([29]: 77). Therefore, both western and Indigenous definitions of illness are included. However, future studies may well take greater account of cultural definitions of health and purposeful sampling. It is worth noting that four of the six authors of this review are themselves Indigenous and bring that perspective to our study to the extent possible.

The circumstances for language maintenance vary greatly, but a broad distinction between first-language speakers (L1) and second-language learners (L2) is expected. Although both quantitative and qualitative studies will be included, it is to be expected that qualitative reports based on self-report are likely to have a positive response bias [30, 31]. In addition, we found that many qualitative studies did not address a specific disease process, being more focused on overall well-being; the exception is our category of education, where there were 7 such studies. The results of this realist review should inform the design of more direct studies, including prospective ones.

Methods

Maintenance and revitalization of Indigenous languages are not intrinsically framed as health interventions. Maintenance, in particular, allows for a continuation of linguistic practices (thereby avoiding language extinction), while revitalization must often find ways of reintroducing language, sometimes even from historical records. It is the use of a language despite the breakdown in typical language transmission and/or pressure to adopt a majority language. Revitalization is a relatively new process, as reintroduction of a traditional language based on a cohort of current speaker and/or on historical records has not been necessary or feasible until modern times. The studies surveyed here are therefore ones that report health outcomes for both kinds of Indigenous language situations: where the language is still being transmitted as a first language and/or where the language is being revived. Some languages may have aspects of both language techniques for different segments of the community, but this level of detail is missing from the published reports. Some of the studies explicitly examine language as an issue, but many have the issue of language use embedded within them. In the latter case, correlations between language and health may not be remarked upon in the report itself. Thus many of the studies do not report on a “complex service intervention” as defined in Pawson et al. [18], but the correlational analyses allow us to gauge the effects of language use indirectly.

Some of the studies in our preliminary publication [16] and additional searches were in grey literature, and many were poorly indexed by simple search terms. Health outcomes have been found for a broad range of diseases and conditions, and some relevant papers will appear in search results set only if a keyword for the specific disease process at hand (such as “suicide” or “diabetes”) is used. It was not possible to list and search for every health issue that may have been studied in relation to Indigenous language use. Similarly, there is no search strategy, hedge, or filter to comprehensively retrieve papers about worldwide Indigenous communities, and indeed no single database in which that literature is comprehensively collected and fully searchable [32]. Therefore, the search of publication databases by keywords alone was inadequate for finding relevant resources. This review thus relies more heavily on citation chaining than other reviews (cf. [18]: 29), but citation chaining (also described as “snowballing”) is recognized as a valuable and productive technique in realist reviews [33].

Search methods and criteria for identification of studies

The search of the bibliographic databases was conducted by a medical research librarian in collaboration with the corresponding author. Seeding of the search came from references previously reported [16] or identified by study personnel during further research. Controlled vocabulary and keywords were used in two Scopus searches (Table 1), one before and one after citation chaining. We chose to use Scopus, without using smaller specialized bibliographic databases such as iPortal or Native Health Database, for several reasons. First, we are confident that our “searching plus citation chaining” approach performs better than a “searching-only” approach. Second, Scopus contains more content, is more frequently updated, and has robust data export options. Forward citation chaining was performed using citationchaser on the researcher-supplied references [34]. This software relies on the citation graph of the Lens database. So, while we searched only one bibliographic database, documents that are not indexed in Scopus could nevertheless be identified by our information retrieval process.

Table 1 Database searches
Full size table

Each article selected for the title/abstract screening round was examined by two out of the five reviewers, randomly assigned. Thus each reviewer examined approximately 1400 abstracts. Conflicts between these two reviewers were resolved following a consensus approach (MEL, SG, DHW). The following inclusion and exclusion criteria were used. Inclusions were 1) Quantitative or qualitative report of health outcomes (Health outcomes include physical and mental issues, and “wellness” broadly defined; graduation rates/school performance are also health outcomes); 2) Indigenous language use, either maintenance by first-language speakers or revitalization (learning by second-language speakers), was related to health outcome; 3) Population in the Americas, Australia or New Zealand. Exclusions at the title and abstract screening stage were grouped into following reasons: 1) no health outcome was reported, 2) language use could not be related to the health outcome, 3) article focused on geographic areas outside of the target, 4) article not published in English, Spanish, French, Portuguese or German, and 5) other reasons.

In order to be included, the publications must have described correlations between language use and health outcomes. Both quantitative and qualitative studies were accepted, with “qualitative” including “eyewitness” accounts [35] describing personal (often self-reflective) observations of either specific or global effects for individuals or groups. At the title and abstract stage, records were only excluded if the two screeners were confident that they did not meet the criteria. Unclear cases went on for more screening.

The articles initially selected for full-text screening were screened in detail for all inclusion and exclusion criteria. The full-text screening round was conducted by a primary reviewer (DHW) and one of the four other reviewers (MEL, SG, BM, BA). Conflicts were resolved following a consensus approach (DHW, MEL, SG). Final data extraction was initially performed by one reviewer (DHW) and validated by the other original reviewer of that article.

Non-peer-reviewed documents (e.g., conference papers, government reports, etc.) were included if they seemed to have original research. For example, masters theses and dissertations were included but periodicals such as newspapers and magazines were not. No authors were contacted.

Data categories were derived from an estimation of the most useful way to organize the rather disparate results. Some topics were typical labels for health issues, such as diabetes, suicide or obesity. Even there, some subcategories were found, such as suicidal ideation or weight control. Other broad categories, such general health or education, had multiple subcategories that still seemed more appropriate to consider together. Topics that appeared in a single study and did not seem to belong to one of the (emergent) broad categories were listed as “Other.” Both the broad, “overall,” category and the subcategories are listed in Table 2.

Table 2 Categories used for grouping results (“overall category”) and the more specific descriptors used in the studies (“subcategories)
Full size table

Health outcomes were classified broadly, with many studies using separate terms for potentially equivalent outcomes (“well-being,” “good health,” “general fitness,” “protective factor,” and others being examples). These are listed in full in Table 2.

Quant/Qual is a binary choice for studies. Note that some publications have multiple studies, and sometimes there are examples of both quantitative and qualitative studies in the same publication.

Pos/Neut/Neg is a three-way distinction for the effect of Indigenous language use on the health outcome: positive, neutral or negative. Some studies were coded as neutral when members of one group (e.g., males) had a negative outcome and another (in this example, females) had a positive one. Most of the statistical analysis within the selected manuscripts reported results for the entire population. However, for reasons of brevity, some minor results were not represented in our assessments, such as when multiple groups are assessed. In those cases, as now explained, a positive or negative result would be reported if the minor category was neutral. If both a positive and a negative result obtained, the overall categorization was “neutral.”

The bibliographic database search and citation chaining yielded a total of 360 references for full text review (see Fig. 1). Table 3 shows the characteristics of the 129 of the 130 papers included for the final analysis, (see below for the explanation of the exclusion).

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram of current results. Adapted from: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71. For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/

Full size image
Table 3 Effects of Indigenous language maintenance and/or revitalization on health issues. Numbers reflect the study involved. See Table 2 for elaboration of Health Outcomes. Studies were either Qualitative (part a) or Quantitative (part b). Some reports include multiple issues and/or techniques and will thus be listed more than once.
Full size table

It is worth noting that one of the papers cited in the original 2016 review [36] did not pass the abstract screening stage. The degree to which language informed the “enculturation” metric was not obvious from the abstract, so the article was not passed on to full-text review. By comparison, even more straightforward screening processes have been found to have a 3% miss rate for dual screening [37], so this gap is not completely unexpected. It is therefore likely that other relevant articles would have been found had it been feasible to do a full-text review of all articles. A second study that was included in the original study was excluded at the full text stage [38]. The connection between geographic area and language use did not seem as strong in relation to the other studies found in this realist review for inclusion in this paper.

One study was excluded from the tables because there were contradictions between the description in the text and the data in the table [39]. The text claims a negative effect of language while the table shows a positive effect. The table may have had a miscoding that did, indeed, match the verbal description, but that was impossible to assess. Our solution was to exclude the study altogether.

Results

Results indicate that the majority of reviewed articles found a relationship between Indigenous language use and positive health outcomes (N = 90, 62.1%); the remainder were fairly evenly divided between neutral (N = 24, 16.6%) and negative (N = 31, 21.4%). (Quantitative studies reported statistical significance while qualitative ones did not.) The total number of reported effects is larger than the number of citations because some articles reported more than one outcome. Table 3 lists the citation number of the cited studies organized by Health Outcome, Quantitative/Qualitative, and Positive/Neutral/Negative. Several studies addressed more than one issue, or the same issue by both quantitative and qualitative means, and therefore will appear more than once. Fig. 2 presents the counts of the results graphically.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Count of study results in the included studies. Positive outcomes are in dark blue; neutral in light blue; and negative in red

Full size image

Qualitative results were only found for the categories “General” and “Education.” They were overwhelmingly positive, with no negative results and only one neutral one. Speakers maintaining their language and learners acquiring an ancestral language both report general improvement in health or ability to achieve academic goals. One author even showed improvement before beginning a language program, as she “made a commitment for four years to not drink because [she] wanted to be a good language learner” ([35]: p. 866).

The quantitative studies for those same two categories are generally positive (50.0%), but with more neutral results (21.7%) and the presence of negative results (28.3%). For the “General” negative results, all nine studies mention the high correlation of Indigenous language use and poverty as a potential underlying factor. Many of the “Education” negative results were based on assessments made in the matrix language, not in the Indigenous one. However, there are positive cases in just those same circumstances (e.g., [61, 99, 102, 110]). Because the correlation with poverty is prevalent in the positive cases as well as the negative ones, the positive outcomes are even more impressive.

Reports of the effect of language use on rates of smoking were fairly evenly divided, with three positive outcomes and four negative ones. The former were all based on surveys conducted in the United States, while the latter were performed in Canada. It is possible that the construction of the surveys differed in ways that would skew the results one way or another, or it could be that the geographic difference is a real one. Cultural factors may differ enough between the two countries that the difference is genuine, even though many tribes and bands cross the national border.

The results are even more mixed for obesity, both across studies and within. Here, the geographic difference found for smoking did not appear, as studies of Canadian populations occurred in all three categories, with the US and New Zealand showing positive or neutral results. Within studies, the results can be more mixed than our schematic results indicate. For example, Young [143] found negative associations for women but neutral ones for men. This was attributed to different rates of acculturation, as the socio-economic status (SES) differed between the groups. The recent emphasis on traditional foods is not reflected in these studies, and future developments could be expected to show more positive results due to the frequent incorporation of Indigenous languages into the traditional food movement [168].

The two studies of language use and diabetes, one from the US and one from New Zealand, reported positive correlations. Oster et al. [144] and Teng et al. [145] both assessed Indigenous language use and health status using public records. It is important to note that one study that surveyed diabetic patients from small communities in Mexico [160] was not included in the diabetes category. Instead, it was categorized as “self care” given that is the health outcome that was measured. Therefore, this study appears in the “Other” category. Although we classified its results as negative, the results for language as a main effect were not significant; it was only in combination with poverty that language appeared as a risk factor (Fig. 1, p. 885). As has been the case with other negative results, the correlation of Indigenous language use is at times also correlated with poverty, which itself is independently linked to negative health outcomes. Without that link, the use of language appears to be a protective factor for “self care” among persons with diabetes.

Crime, which includes both arrests and being a victim, was found to have language as a protective factor in one study and a neutral factor in two others. All three cases are from Australia. The positive result [133] was for the experience of violence in remote areas, where speaking the local language may have led to more resilient community connections. One of the neutral results ([74]: 326) was based on conflicting results for strong vs. moderate/weak cultural attachment (to which language use was a major contributor): Strong connections were protective against arrest by the police, but moderate and weak connections led to (nonsignificant) increases in arrests. The other neutral result ([73]: 23), which coded language use more directly, found no effect for ever having been arrested by the police with strong and weak language use, but positive (protective) effects for the moderate language use group. These rather conflicting results suggest the need for more detailed study of the “crime” category, both within Australia and in other regions.

There were 13 studies that addressed other issues. Results were more mixed in these cases. Some of the outcomes did not seem to be strong health indicators (e.g., poverty, less intercourse, cancer screening). Many of these studies were difficult to interpret, relying on high level descriptions of language use (e.g., from census data) or finding marginal results in complex analyses.

The reports for mental health and suicide reduction were largely positive (78.9%), with neutral and negative cases each accounting for 10.5%. Results on suicide have been among the most commonly cited on the issue of language and health. Mental health illness and distress within Indigenous communities is elevated in part given that racism based on tribal identity is often a source of discrimination and degradation in non-Indigenous society. This can relate to risk to physical and emotional health [169]. Cultural connection offers a buffer to the stresses of bias and discrimination by offering connection, support, and culturally specific ways to address negative experiences. Overall, however, language use has clear positive benefits on improving mental health for all ages, and in reducing suicide, particularly with youth.

Discussion

The published literature substantially supports the hypothesis that active use or learning of an Indigenous language has positive health benefits. The majority of studies (62.1%) indicate positive effects, while a minority show negative effects (21.4%). This is critical information for language programs and health programs alike given that many Indigenous communties face persistent public health crises, as well as impending language loss. These results follow major trends demonstrating the importance of enculturation. For instance, cultural tailoring of health programs or the use of “culture as treatment” itself produce positive health outcomes within Indigenous communities [168, 170,171,172]. The issues range from cardiometabolic disease to mental health and to substance abuse. In other words, traditional cultural beliefs and practices are health promoting and their absence poses serious health risks to Indigenous communities.

Although qualitative studies, especially those based on self-report, may have an intrinsic positive response bias, we encountered no negative qualitative reports in our review. Those who feel that learning the language did not help them, or even set them back, may be less likely to be located and report in this kind of literature. However, qualitative reports offer a richness to data that is less often found in quantitative data and these may be important articles to highlight when moving forward in learning about mechanisms of improved health via language maintenance and revitalization.

Most of the negative effects on health arise from strong correlations between Indigenous language use and confounding factors such as SES. Considering that poverty has a well-established negative influence on health (e.g. [173, 174]), such an outcome is not surprising. What is surprising is that the majority of reviewed studies show a positive effect in health outcomes despite the correlation of language use with poverty. Thus, Indigenous language use could be a protective factor for health and well-being for those experiencing poverty.

One specific area that is well-represented in both positive and negative findings is tobacco use. There were 3 studies that found positive influences and 4 that found negative influences of language use. The negative studies were all based on large-scale survey data, and the others were based on small-scale surveys. Three of the four negative studies examined the 2012 Aboriginal People’s Survey [175]. This survey did not list tobacco use as a potential traditional activity (p. 55), even though some cigarette smoking may be considered a cultural practice [176]. The Survey’s assessments of tobacco use included three responses, “smoking frequency, age began smoking, exposure to second-hand smoke in the home” (p. 57). These limitations may have biased the results toward negative interpretations. Small-scale surveys, on the other hand, might elicit a desire on the part of the respondent to appear more healthful than is accurate. Further, even though the reports were specifically about cigarettes, it is not clear whether Ryan et al. ([123]: 115) found no correlation between degree of cultural practice and smoking, while Wolsko et al. [121] found that traditional culture was correlated with less cigarette consumption (though greater smokeless usage, as found in other studies of Yupik populations). One positive outcome for tobacco use [121] is based on the use of “iq’mik,” a smokeless, chewing mix of tobacco, moss, and other ingredients. This has been found to lower, rather than raise, biomarkers for ill effects of tobacco [177]. While it is possible that this particular tobacco use has positive health effects, for the purpose of this article, we will continue to code other tobacco use as negative in line with the recommendations of major health organizations (e.g., American Heart Association). Hopefully, more research around Indigenous specific practices, uses, and types of tobacco will be able to more clearly demarcate harmful versus protective uses of tobacco [176].

Some of the negative and null results for education relied on testing L1 speakers in the matrix language, in these cases, English or Spanish. Although this can appear as an unfair assessment of a student’s progress, there are also positive cases, especially for L2 speakers of Hawaiian [178] and Myaamia [41]. English language results were better for L2 students compared to those who were using only English in all cases. This may be due to the positive cases’ examining students learning the Indigenous language as a second language (L2) and are already competent in the primary language (L1), while the negative studies were largely based on first-language speakers (L1) who are learning English or Spanish as an L2 for the first time. The educational environment can also be expected to differ in these two cases, with more effort (and therefore support) being required for the overall school environment in the L2 case, in which the new (Indigenous) language must be deliberately implemented. Those L1 speakers in an L2 monolingual school environment, on the other hand, can be seen to impose an extra burden on the teachers because they are likely to have weaker skills in their second language than students in the same class who have that language as their first one. Given this interpretation, there is further support for L2 learning as it has been shown to improve, or at least not impair, L1 (matrix language) achievement.

Language revitalization can be performed at widely varying levels of funding. For example, a Canadian study found that an average of $5-6 million (Canadian) per year ($4-5 million US) would support language maintenance and revitalization for one community [179]. Programs aimed at individual health issues can be effective in a more focused way, but they are unlikely to address other health issues. Budgets for health vary greatly by tribe. For example, one of the largest tribes in the country (Cherokee Nation) had a budget of $924.5 million for health and $18 million for language in 2021 [180], while a tribal community in New Mexico spends $1 million per year [181]. Some language revitalization programs began with virtually no money [182] and yet went on to succeed in their language efforts. Others have had initial funding which was not sustained, resulting in the closing of the program [183]. Overall, the cost of revitalization is quite comparable to those health programs addressing a single issue, yet it demonstrates positive effects for multiple health issues.

The largest proportion of positive studies in one area occurred for mental health and suicide prevention. Suicide among American Indians is double the rate of non-American Indians in the US and is a clear public health crisis [184]. The most promising programs directly addressing single issues are the mental health/suicide interventions today that center on Indigenous culture [185,186,187]. The feeling of connectedness to community and pride in cultural heritage are enhanced by learning or maintaining an Indigenous language. As acknowledged elsewhere, other cultural activities besides language can also improve connectedness and pride. Language is, however, the most definitive and most universal expression of a culture. Cultural activities such as beading, drumming, canoe building, etc., will not be shared by all members of a community. Language can be part of all of them. There are yet to be any studies that directly compare cultural revival with and without language. Based on the literature and the results of this study, our expectation is that adding language revitalization to cultural revival will have a significant and large separate influence on improving mental health.

Conclusions

As we enter the United Nations International Decade of Indigenous Languages (https://en.unesco.org/idil2022-2032), it is important to assess the specific benefits of Indigenous languages. The results of this survey clearly indicate that Indigenous language use—regardless of proficiency level—has positive effects on health. While further research is needed to understand the mechanisms and most effective practices, Indigenous communities can be confident that their language revitalization programs are worth the effort and cost. Relative to the cost of individual programs directed at each of the health issues studied here, language programs hold the promise of widespread effects from a single program. Indigenous groups have endured decades of relatively poor health outcomes. Language revitalization is both empowering and promising for making significant improvements to the health and well-being of Indigenous communities.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. We use the term Indigenous to refer to the Native people of the Americas, Australia and New Zealand (the geographic areas surveyed here). We understand the use of labels has ethical and political implications, and we do not wish to perpetuate the insensitivity of many of these labels. Further, the word Indigenous will be capitalized to indicate that it is being used in this specified sense.

References

  1. Skutnabb-Kangas T, Bear Nicholas A, Reyhner J. Linguistic human rights and language revitalization in the USA and Canada. In: McCarty TL, Coronel-Molina SM, editors. Indigenous language revitalization in the Americas. New York: Routledge; 2016. p. 181–200.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hale K, Krauss M, Watahomigie LJ, Yamamoto AY, Craig C, Masayesva Jeanne L, et al. Endangered languages. Language. 1992;68:1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ladefoged P. Another view of endangered languages. Language. 1992;68:809–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hinton L. Flutes of fire: essays on California Indian languages. Berkeley: Heyday Books; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Leonard WY. Miami language reclamation in the home: a case study [Ph.D. dissertation]. Ann Arbor: University of California, Berkeley; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hinton L. Sleeping languages: can they be awakened? In: Hinton L, Hale K, editors. The Green book of language revitalization in practice. London: Academic; 2001. p. 413–7.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Baldwin D, Olds J. Miami Indian language and cultural research at Miami University. In: Cobb DM, Fowler L, editors. Beyond red power: American Indian politics and activism since 1900. Santa Fe: SAR Press; 2007. p. 280–90.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fishman JA. Reversing language shift. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sims CP. Tribal languages and the challenges of revitalization. Anthropol Educ Q. 2005;36(1):104–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Spolsky B. Conditions for language revitalization: a comparison of the cases of Hebrew and Maori. Curr. Issues Lang. Soc. 1995;2(3):177–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zuckermann G. Revivalistics: from the genesis of Israeli to language reclamation in Australia and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2020.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Williams CH. The lightening veil: language revitalization in Wales. Rev Res Educ. 2014;38(1):242–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Te KJ. Kohanga Reo: Māori language revitalization. In: Hinton L, Hale K, editors. The Green book of language revitalization in practice. London: Academic; 2001. p. 119–28.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kawai'ae'a KKC, Housman AKK, MKA A. Pū'ā i ka 'Ōlelo, Ola ka 'Ohana: three generations of Hawaiian language revitalization. Hūlili. 2007;4(1):183–237.

    Google Scholar 

  15. McCarty TL. The holistic benefits of education for indigenous language revitalisation and reclamation (ELR2). J Multiling Multicult Dev. 2020:1–14.

  16. Whalen DH, Moss MP, Baldwin D. Healing through language: Positive physical health effects of indigenous language use [version 1; referees: awaiting peer review]. F1000Res. 2016;5(852).

  17. Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson AM, DeCorby K, Bucknall TK, Kent B, et al. Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(1_suppl):21–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Berg RC, Nanavati J. Realist review: Current practice and future prospects. J. Res. Pract. 2016;12(1(R1)):1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lefler LJ, editor. Under the rattlesnake: Cherokee health and resiliency. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Baron M, Riva M, Fletcher C, Lynch M, Lyonnais M-C, Laouan Sidi EA. Conceptualisation and operationalisation of a holistic indicator of health for older Inuit: results of a sequential mixed-methods project. Soc Indic Res. 2021;155(1):47–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McBeath BM. Conceptualization of community wellness in three First Nations communities [M.S. thesis]. Kingston: Queen’s University; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lichtenstein AH, Berger A, Cheng MJ. Definitions of healing and healing interventions across different cultures. J. Palliat. Med. 2017;6(3):248–52.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kirmayer LJ, Sehdev M, Whitley R, Dandeneau SF, Isaac C. Community resilience: models, metaphors and measures. Int. J. Indig. Health. 2009;5(1):62–117.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Durie M. An indigenous model of health promotion. Health Promot J Austr. 2004;15(3):181–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dapice AN. The medicine wheel. J Transcult Nurs. 2006;17(3):251–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shakespeare M, Fisher M, Mackean T, Wilson R. Theories of indigenous and non-indigenous wellbeing in Australian health policies. Health Promot Int. 2021;36(3):669–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lambert L, Wenzel E. Medicine keepers: issues in indigenous health. In: Green J, Labonté R, editors. Critical perspectives in public health. London: Routledge; 2008. p. 196–207.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Waller MA, Risley-Curtiss C, Murphy S, Medill A, Moore G. Harnessing the positive power of language. J Poverty. 1998;2(4):63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sanchez M, Hidalgo B, Rosario A, Artiles L, Stewart AL, Nápoles AM. Applying self-report measures in minority health and health disparities research. In: Dankwa-Mullan I, Pérez-Stable EJ, Gardner KL, Zhang X, Rosario AM, editors. The science of health disparities research. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell; 2021. p. 153–69.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Kemmelmeier M. Cultural differences in survey responding: issues and insights in the study of response biases. Int J Psychol. 2016;51(6):439–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Harding L, Marra CJ, Illes J. Establishing a comprehensive search strategy for indigenous health literature reviews. Syst. Rev. 2021;10(1):115.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Duddy C, Roberts N. Identifying evidence for five realist reviews in primary health care: a comparison of search methods. Res Synth Methods. 2022;13(2):190–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Haddaway NR, Grainger MJ, Gray CT. citationchaser: An R package and Shiny app for forward and backward citations chasing in academic searching; 2021. https://zenodo.org/record/4543513#.YrYZWC2ZN-U.

  35. Taff A, Chee M, Hall J, MYD H, Martin KN, Johnston A. Indigenous language use impacts wellness. In: Rehg K, Campbell L, editors. Oxford Handbook of Endangered Languages. New York: Oxford University Press; 2018. p. 862–83.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Torres Stone RA, Whitbeck LB, Chen X, Johnson K, Olson DM. Traditional practices, traditional spirituality, and alcohol cessation among American Indians. J Stud Alcohol. 2006;67:236–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Gartlehner G, Affengruber L, Titscher V, Noel-Storr A, Dooley G, Ballarini N, et al. Single-reviewer abstract screening missed 13 percent of relevant studies: a crowd-based, randomized controlled trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;121:20–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nez Henderson P, Jacobsen C, Beals J. Correlates of cigarette smoking among selected southwest and Northern Plains tribal groups: the AI-SUPERPFP study. Am J Public Health. 2005;95:867–72.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Delgado MC, Mendoza GMP, Urbano OMC, Ramírez NP, Saavedra CC, Saravia MG, et al. Factors associated with physical mistreatment against children under the age of five and performed by their mothers. Rev. Cuba. de Medicina Gen. Integral. 2020;36(3):1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sivak L, Westhead S, Richards E, Atkinson S, Richards J, Dare H, et al. “Language breathes life”—Barngarla community perspectives on the wellbeing impacts of reclaiming a dormant Australian Aboriginal language. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(20):3918.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Shea H, Mosley-Howard GS, Baldwin D, Ironstrack G, Rousmaniere K, Schroer JE. Cultural revitalization as a restorative process to combat racial and cultural trauma and promote living well. Cult Divers Ethn Minor Psychol. 2019;25(4):553–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Hond R, Ratima M, Edwards W. The role of Māori community gardens in health promotion: a land-based community development response by Tangata Whenua, people of their land. Glob. Health Promot. 2019;26(3_suppl):44–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Erasmus MT. Goyatıı̀ K’aàt’ıı̀ Ats’ edee, K’aàt’ıı̀ Adets’ edee: Ho! [M. A. Thesis]. Victoria: University of Victoria; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Euale N. The Mountains are Healing: Engaging with Splatsin knowledges of wellbeing, dispossession and land-based healing [M. A. thesis]. Guelph: University of Guelph; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jenni B, Anisman A, McIvor O, Jacobs P. An exploration of the effects of mentor-apprentice programs on mentors' and apprentices' wellbeing. Int. J. Indig. Health. 2017;12(2):25–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Clark N, Walton P, Drolet J, Tribute T, Jules G, Main T, et al. Melq’ilwiye (coming together): re-imagining mental health for urban indigenous youth through intersections of identity, sovereignty, and resistance. In: Morrow M, Malcoe LH, editors. Critical inquiries for social justice in mental health. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2017. p. 165–94.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Grayshield L, Rutherford JJ, Salazar SB, Mihecoby AL, Luna LL. Understanding and healing historical trauma: the perspectives of native American elders. J Ment Health Couns. 2015;37(4):295–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. English KAU. Through the eyes of children: First Nations children's perceptions of health [M.S. thesis]. London: University of Western Ontario; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Dana-Sacco G. Health as a proxy for living the good life: a critical approach to the problem of translation and praxis in language endangered Indigenous communities. Fourth World J. 2012;11(2):7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Brown HJ, McPherson G, Peterson R, Newman V, Cranmer B. Our land, our language: connecting dispossession and health equity in an indigenous context. Can J Nurs Res. 2012;44(2):44–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Mmari KN, Blum RW, Teufel-Shone N. What increases risk and protection for delinquent behaviors among American Indian youth?: findings from three tribal communities. Youth Soc. 2010;41:382–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Antone G. The way of the drum: when earth becomes heart: part I: healing the tears of yesterday by the drum today: the Oneida language is a healing medicine. In: Burnaby B, Reyhner J, editors. Indigenous languages across the community. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University; 2002. p. 49–54.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Kulmann K. We should be listening to our elders. Evaluation of transfer of indigenous knowledge between Anishinabe youth and elders [M. A. thesis]. London: University of Western Ontario; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Colquhoun S, Dockery AM. The link between indigenous culture and wellbeing: qualitative evidence for Australian Aboriginal peoples. Perth: Centre for Labour Market Research; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Menzies O, Dudley M, Garrett N, Elder H, Daniels P, Wilson D. He Tūhononga Whaiaro: a Kaupapa Māori approach to mate wareware (dementia) and cognitive assessment of older Māori. J Appl Gerontol. 2022;41(4):1066–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Durie M, Allan GR, Cunningham CW, Edwards W, Forster ME, Gillies A, et al. Oranga Kaumātua: The health and wellbeing of older Māori people. Wellington: Research Centre for Māori Health and Development Te Pumanawa Hauora: Massey University; 1997. Report No.: TPH 93/3 Contract No.: TPH 96/3

  57. Tulloch S, Kusugak A, Chenier C, Pilakapsi Q, Uluqsi G, Walton F. Transformational bilingual learning: re-engaging marginalized learners through language, culture, community, and identity. Can Mod Lang Rev. 2017;73(4):438–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Petrucka P, Bickford D, Bassendowski S, Goodwill W, Wajunta C, Yuzicappi B, et al. Positive leadership, legacy, lifestyles, attitudes, and activities for Aboriginal youth: a wise practices approach for positive Aboriginal youth futures. Int. J. Indig. Health. 2016;11(1):177–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Hill R. Transitioning from Māori-medium to English-medium education: emerging findings of a pilot study. Int J Biling Educ Biling. 2016;19(3):249–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Hill R. Transitioning from Māori-medium to English: pursuing biliteracy. N Z J Educ Stud. 2016;51(1):33–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wilson WPH. USDE violations of NALA and the testing boycott at Nāwahīokalani'ōpu'u school. J. Am. Indian Educ. 2012;51(3):30–45.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Gunn TM, Pomahac G, Striker EG, Tailfeathers J. First nations, Métis, and Inuit education: the Alberta initiative for school improvement approach to improve indigenous education in Alberta. J Educ Chang. 2011;12(3):323–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Moore S. Language and identity in an indigenous teacher education program. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2019;78(2):1506213.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Wright A, Yap M, Jones R, Richardson A, Davis V, Lovett R. Examining the associations between Indigenous Rangers, culture and wellbeing in Australia, 2018–2020. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021;18(6(3053)):1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Lewis D. Tlilnuo'lti'k-Weji-sqalia'timk-How we will be Mi'kmaq on our land: Working together with Pictou Landing First Nation to redefine a healthy community [Ph.D. dissertation]. Halifax: Dalhousie University; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Schultz R, Quinn SJ, Abbott T, Cairney S, Yamaguchi J. Quantification of interplaying relationships between wellbeing priorities of Aboriginal people in remote Australia. Int. Indig. Policy J. 2019;10(3).

  67. Philip J, Ryman TK, Hopkins SE, O'Brien DM, Bersamin A, Pomeroy J, et al. Bi-cultural dynamics for risk and protective factors for cardiometabolic health in an Alaska native (Yup’ik) population. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0183451.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Cairney S, Abbott T, Quinn S, Yamaguchi J, Wilson B, Wakerman J. Interplay wellbeing framework: a collaborative methodology ‘bringing together stories and numbers’ to quantify Aboriginal cultural values in remote Australia. Int. J. Equity Health. 2017;16(1(68)):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Janssen I, Lévesque L, Xu F. Correlates of physical activity among first nations children residing in first nations communities in Canada. Can J Public Health. 2014;105(6):e412–e417.

  70. Biddle N. Measuring and analysing the wellbeing of Australia’s indigenous population. Soc Indic Res. 2014;116(3):713–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Eliassen B-M, Braaten T, Melhus M, Hansen KL, Broderstad AR. Acculturation and self-rated health among Arctic indigenous peoples: a population-based cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2012;12(1):948.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Hodge FS, Nandy K. Predictors of wellness and American Indians. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2011;22:791–803.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Dockery AM. Traditional culture and the wellbeing of indigenous Australians: an analysis of the 2008 NATSISS. Perth: Centre for Labour Market Research, Curtin University Perth; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Dockery AM. Culture and wellbeing: the case of indigenous Australians. Soc Indic Res. 2010;99(2):315–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Richmond CAM. The social determinants of Inuit health: a focus on social support in the Canadian Arctic. Int. J. Circumpolar Health. 2009;68:471–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Trewin D, Madden R. The health and welfare of Australia’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2005.

  77. Coe K, Attakai A, Papenfuss M, Giutiano A, Martin L, Nuvayestewa L. Traditionalism and its relationship to disease risk and protective behaviors of women living on the Hopi reservation. Health Care Women Int . 2004;25:391–410.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Bjerregaard P, Curtis T. The Greenland population study. Cultural change and mental health in Greenland: the association of childhood conditions, language, and urbanization with mental health and suicidal thoughts among the Inuit of Greenland. Soc Sci Med. 2002;54:33–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Han PK, Hagel J, Welty TK, Ross R, Leonardson G, Keckler A. Cultural factors associated with health-risk behavior among the Cheyenne River Sioux. Am Indian Alsk Native Ment Health Res. 1994;5(3):15–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Dyall L, Kepa M, Teh R, Mules R, Moyes SA, Wham C, et al. Cultural and social factors and quality of life of Maori in advanced age. Te puawaitanga o nga tapuwae kia ora tonu-life and living in advanced age: a cohort study in New Zealand (LiLACS NZ). The New Zealand Medical Journal. 2014;127(1393):1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Hermosilla AH, Hernández MEM, Delgado SC. Competencia comunicativa intercultural y aprendizaje de la lengua y la cultura indígena. Opción: Revista de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. 2019;89(2):89–114.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Ryan CJ, Cooke M, Kirkpatrick SI, Leatherdale ST, Wilk P. The correlates of physical activity among adult Métis. Ethn Health. 2018:1–20.

  83. Badets NE. Social determinants of health among off-reserve First Nations, Métis and Inuit youth in Canada [M.A. thesis]. Ottawa: Carleton University; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Greenfield BL, Hallgren KA, Venner KL, Hagler KJ, Simmons JD, Sheche JN, et al. Cultural adaptation, psychometric properties, and outcomes of the native American spirituality scale. Psychol Serv. 2015;12(2):123–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Hopkins KD. An empirical study of resilient psychosocial functioning amongst a population of Western Australia Aboriginal young people 12-17 years [Ph.D. dissertation]. Perth: University of Western Australia; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Guèvremont A, Kohen DE. Knowledge of an Aboriginal language and school outcomes for children and adults. Int J Biling Educ Biling. 2012;15(1):1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. O'Sullivan E. Aboriginal language use and socioeconomic well-being: A multilevel analysis [Ph.D. dissertation]. Hamilton: McMaster University; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  88. First Nations Regional Longitudinal Health Survey. Results for adults, youth and children living in first nations communities. Ottawa: First Nations Centre; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Garza-Rodriguez J, Ayala-Diaz GA, Coronado-Saucedo GG, Garza-Garza EG, Ovando-Martinez O. Determinants of poverty in Mexico: A quantile regression analysis. Economies. 2021;9(2(60)):1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Quezada-Sánchez AD, Shamah-Levy T, Mundo-Rosas V. Socioeconomic characteristics of mothers and their relationship with dietary diversity and food group consumption of their children. Nutr Diet. 2020;77(4):467–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Tapia KA, Garvey G, McEntee MF, Rickard M, Lydiard L, Brennan PC. Breast screening attendance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women in the Northern Territory of Australia. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2019;43(4):334–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Paulino NA, Vázquez MS, Bolúmar F. Indigenous language and inequitable maternal health care, Guatemala, Mexico, Peru and the Plurinational state of Bolivia. Bull World Health Organ. 2019;97(1):59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Banham D, Karnon J, Lynch J. Health related quality of life (HRQoL) among Aboriginal south Australians: a perspective using survey-based health utility estimates. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019;17(1):39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Perdue DG, Henderson JA, Garroutte E, Bogart A, Wen Y, Goldberg J, et al. Culture and colorectal cancer screening on three American Indian reservations. Ethn Dis. 2011;21(3):342.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Capone K, Spence N, White J. Examining the association between Aboriginal language skills and well-being in First Nations communities. London: Aboriginal Policy Research Consortium International; 2010.

  96. Galván GM, Atalah SE. Variables asociadas a la calidad de la dieta en preescolares de Hidalgo. Rev. Chil. Nutr. 2008;35(4):413–20.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Wingert S. Well-being in first nations communities: a comparison of objective and subjective dimensions. In: White JP, Beavon D, Spence N, editors. Aboriginal well-being: Canada's continuing challenge. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing; 2007. p. 209–30.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Guèvremont A, Kohen D. Speaking an Aboriginal language and school outcomes for Canadian first nations children living off reserve. Int J Biling Educ Biling. 2019;22(4):518–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Wilson B, Quinn SJ, Abbott T, Cairney S. The role of Aboriginal literacy in improving English literacy in remote Aboriginal communities: an empirical systems analysis with the interplay wellbeing framework. Educ Res Policy Prac. 2018;17(1):1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Mosley-Howard GS, Baldwin D, Ironstrack G, Rousmaniere K, Burke B. Niila Myaamia (I am Miami): identity and retention of Miami tribe college students. J. Coll. Stud. Retent.: Res. 2016;17:437–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Arim RG, Tam B, Bougie E, Kohen DE. School outcomes among elementary school-aged Inuit children in Inuit Nunangat. Aborig. Policy Stud. 2016;5(2):32–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Mier y Terán M, Rabell C. Escolaridad y lengua hablada en comunidades rurales de la península yucateca. Rev Mex Sociol. 2013;75(3):371–406.

    Google Scholar 

  103. O'Donnell JL. The indigenous, national, and international language in higher education: students' academic trajectories in Oaxaca. Int. J. Appl. Linguist. 2010;20(3):386–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Bougie E, Senécal S. Registered Indian children's school success and intergenerational effects of residential schooling in Canada. Int. Indig. Policy J. 2010;1(1 (5)):1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Usborne E, Caouette J, Qumaaluk Q, Taylor DM. Bilingual education in an Aboriginal context: examining the transfer of language skills from Inuktitut to English or French. Int J Biling Educ Biling. 2009;12:667–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Thomas DR. Culture and ethnicity: maintaining the distinction. Aust J Psychol. 1986;38(3):371–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Taylor DM, Wright SC. Do Aboriginal students benefit from education in their heritage language? Results from a ten-year program of research in Nunavik. Can J Nativ Stud. 2003;23:1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Solano-Flores G, Backhoff E, Contreras-Niño LA, Vázquez-Muñoz M. Language shift and the inclusion of indigenous populations in large-scale assessment programs. Int J Test. 2015;15(2):136–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Usborne E, Peck J, Smith D-L, Taylor DM. Learning through an Aboriginal language: the impact on students' English and Aboriginal language skills. Can J Educ. 2011;34(4):200–15.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Guèvremont A, Kohen D. Aboriginal language and school outcomes: Investigating the associations for young adults. Int. Indig. Policy J. 2017;8(1(6)):1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Morcom LA, Roy S. Learning through language: academic success in an Indigenous language immersion kindergarten. J Am Indian Educ. 2017;56(2):57–80.

  112. Guenther J. Taken for a ride? The disconnect between high school completion, employment and income for remote Australian first nations peoples. Race Ethn Educ. 2021;24(1):132–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Delprato M. Indigenous learning gaps and home language instruction: new evidence from PISA-D. Int J Educ Res. 2021;109:101800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Blanco E. Análisis de la brecha de aprendizaje entre indígenas y no indígenas en la enseñanza primaria en México. Rev. Electron. de Investig. y Evaluacion Educ. 2019;21(e16):1–15.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Bougie E, Kohen D, Guèvremont A. Indigenous language knowledge and educational attainment among First Nations people: Trends over time. Int. Indig. Policy J. 2018;9(4).

  116. O'Gorman M, Pandey M. Explaining low high school attainment in northern Aboriginal communities: an analysis of the Aboriginal Peoples' surveys. Can Public Policy. 2015;41(4):297–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Zubrick S, Silburn S, De Maio JA, Shepherd C, Griffin JA, Dalby RB, et al. Western Australian Aboriginal child health survey: improving the educational experiences of Aboriginal children and young people. Perth: Curtin University of Technology and Telethon Institute for Child Health Research; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  118. McEwan PJ. The indigenous test score gap in Bolivia and Chile. Econ Dev Cult Chang. 2004;53(1):157–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Levitan J, Post D. Indigenous student learning outcomes and education policies in Peru and Ecuador. In: Cortina R, editor. Indigenous education policy, equity, and intercultural understanding in Latin America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US; 2017. p. 27–49.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Greenfield BL, Venner KL, Tonigan JS, Honeyestewa M, Hubbell H, Bluehorse D. Low rates of alcohol and tobacco use, strong cultural ties for native American college students in the southwest. Addict Behav. 2018;82:122–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  121. Wolsko C, Mohatt GV, Lardon C, Burket R. Smoking, chewing, and cultural identity: prevalence and correlates of tobacco use among the Yup’ik—the Center for Alaska Native Health Research (CANHR) study. Cult Divers Ethn Minor Psychol. 2009;15(2):165–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Van Bewer V, Woodgate RL. Examining the correlates of current smoking among off-reserve first nations, Métis and Inuit youth: evidence from the 2012 Aboriginal peoples survey. Addict. Behav. 2017;69:93–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Ryan CJ, Leatherdale ST, Cooke MJ. Factors associated with current smoking among off-reserve first nations and Métis youth: results from the 2012 Aboriginal peoples survey. J Prim Prev. 2017;38(1):105–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Ryan CJ, Leatherdale ST, Cooke MJ. A cross-sectional examination of the correlates of current smoking among off-reserve First Nations and Métis adults: Evidence from the 2012 Aboriginal Peoples Survey. Addict. Behav. 2016;54(Supplement C):75–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Ryan CJ, Cooke MJ, Leatherdale ST, Kirkpatrick SI, Wilk P. The correlates of current smoking among adult Métis: Evidence from the Aboriginal Peoples Survey and Métis Supplement. Can. J. Public Health. 2015;106(5).

  126. Ritland L, Thomas V, Jongbloed K, Zamar DS, Teegee MP, Christian W-K, et al. The Cedar Project: relationship between child apprehension and attempted suicide among young indigenous mothers impacted by substance use in two Canadian cities. PLoS One. 2021;16(6):e0252993.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Pezzia C, Hernandez LM. Suicidal ideation in an ethnically mixed, highland Guatemalan community. Transcult. Psychiatry. 2021;59(1):93–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Fuller-Thomson E, Sellors AE, Cameron RE, Baiden P, Agbeyaka S. Factors associated with recovery in Aboriginal people in Canada who had previously been suicidal. Arch. Suicide Res. 2020;24(2):186–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. First Nations Information Governance Centre (FNIGC). First Nations Regional Health Survey (RHS) 2008/10. In: National report on adults, youth and children living in first nations communities. Ottawa: FNIGC; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Haggarty JM, Cernovsky Z, Bedard M, Merskey H. Suicidality in a sample of Arctic households. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2008;38:699–707.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Hallett D, Chandler MJ, Lalonde CE. Aboriginal language knowledge and youth suicide. Cogn Dev. 2007;22:392–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Gibson M, Stuart J, Leske S, Ward R, Tanton R. Suicide rates for young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: the influence of community level cultural connectedness. Med J Aust. 2021;214(11):514–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander wellbeing: A focus on children and youth, Apr 2011. 2011. Contract No.: 4725.0. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/1E6BE19175C1F8C3CA257A0600229ADC.

  134. Brandon A. Alcohol use among off-reserve Canadian Aboriginal adolescents: Prevalence and association with cultural participation [M.Sc. thesis]. Toronto: York University; 2016.

  135. Currie CL, Wild TC, Schopflocher DP, Laing L, Veugelers PJ, Parlee B, et al. Enculturation and alcohol use problems among Aboriginal university students. Can J Psychiatr. 2011;56(12):735–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Ryan CJ, Cooke M, Leatherdale ST. Factors associated with heavy drinking among off-reserve first nations and Métis youth and adults: evidence from the 2012 Canadian Aboriginal peoples survey. Prev Med. 2016;87:95–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Pickel LE. The aftermath of intergenerational trauma: Substance use risk and resiliency [M. Ed. thesis]. London: University of Western Ontario; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Galloway T, Johnson-Down L, Egeland GM. Socioeconomic and cultural correlates of diet quality in the Canadian Arctic: results from the 2007–2008 Inuit health survey. Can J Diet Pract Res. 2015;76(3):117–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Zienczuk N, Egeland GM. Association between socioeconomic status and overweight and obesity among Inuit adults: International Polar Year Inuit Health Survey, 2007–2008. Int. J. Public Health. 2012;71(1 (18419)):1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  140. Gates M. Obesity, physical activity and sedentary behaviour among canadian First Nations youth: An exploration of associated factors and evaluation of a school sports program [Ph.D. dissertation]. Waterloo: University of Waterloo; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  141. Hodge FS, Geishirt Cantrell B, Kim S. Health status and sociodemographic characteristics of the morbidly obese American Indians. Ethn Dis. 2011;21:52–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Cooke MJ, Wilk P, Paul KW, Gonneville SLH. Predictors of obesity among Métis children: socio-economic, behavioural and cultural factors. Can. J. Public Health. 2013;104(4):e298–303.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  143. Young TK. Sociocultural and behavioural determinants of obesity among Inuit in the Central Canadian Arctic. Soc Sci Med. 1996;43(11):1665–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  144. Oster RT, Grier A, Lightning R, Mayan MJ, Toth EL. Cultural continuity, traditional indigenous language, and diabetes in Alberta first nations: a mixed methods study. Int J Equity Health. 2014;13(92):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  145. Teng A, Blakely T, Scott N, Jansen R, Masters-Awatere B, Krebs J, et al. What protects against pre-diabetes progressing to diabetes? Observational study of integrated health and social data. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019;148:119–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  146. Matika CM, Manuela S, Houkamau CA, Sibley CG. Māori and Pasifika language, identity, and wellbeing in Aotearoa New Zealand. Kōtuitui. 2021;16(2):396–418.

    Google Scholar 

  147. Gonzalez MB, Sittner KJ, Saniguq Ullrich J, Walls ML. Spiritual connectedness through prayer as a mediator of the relationship between Indigenous language use and positive mental health. Cult Divers Ethn Minor Psychol. 2021;27(4):746–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Hossain B, Lamb L. Cultural attachment and wellbeing among Canada’s indigenous people: a rural urban divide. J Happiness Stud. 2020;21(4):1303–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Pearce ME, Jongbloed KA, Pooyak SD, Blair AH, Christian WM, Sharma R, et al. The Cedar Project: exploring determinants of psychological distress among young indigenous people who use drugs in three Canadian cities. Global Mental Health. 2018;5:e35.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  150. Pearce ME, Jongbloed KA, Richardson CG, Henderson EW, Pooyak SD, Oviedo-Joekes E, et al. The Cedar Project: resilience in the face of HIV vulnerability within a cohort study involving young indigenous people who use drugs in three Canadian cities. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):1095.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  151. Liebenberg L, Ikeda J, Wood M. “It’s just part of my culture”: understanding language and land in the resilience processes of Aboriginal youth. In: Theron LC, Liebenberg L, Ungar M, editors. Youth resilience and culture: commonalities and complexities. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2015. p. 105–16.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  152. Wright SC, Taylor DM. Identity and the language of the classroom: investigating the impact of heritage versus second language instruction on personal and collective self-esteem. J Educ Psychol. 1995;87(2):241–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  153. Biddle N, Swee H. The relationship between wellbeing and indigenous land, language and culture in Australia. Aust Geogr. 2012;43:215–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  154. Nasreen S, Brar R, Brar S, Maltby A, Wilk P. Are indigenous determinants of health associated with self-reported health professional-diagnosed anxiety disorders among Canadian first nations adults?: findings from the 2012 Aboriginal peoples survey. Community Ment Health J. 2018;54:460–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  155. Verney SP, Suchy-Dicey AM, Cholerton B, Calhoun D, Nelson L, Montine TJ, et al. The associations among sociocultural factors and neuropsychological functioning in older American Indians: the strong heart study. Neuropsychology. 2019;33:1078–88.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  156. Wham C, Maxted E, Teh R, Kerse N. Factors associated with nutrition risk in older Māori: a cross sectional study. N Z Med J. 2015;128:45–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Wilson AR, Johnson RL, Albino J, Jiang L, Schmiege SJ, Brega AG. Parental ethnic identity and its influence on children’s oral health in American Indian families. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021;18(8 (4130)):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  158. Brega AG, Henderson WG, Harper M, Thomas JF, Manson SM, Batliner TS, et al. Association of ethnic identity with oral health knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and outcomes on the Navajo nation. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2019;30(1):143.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  159. Auger N, Fon Sing M, Park AL, Lo E, Trempe N, Luo Z-C. Preterm birth in the Inuit and first nations populations of Québec, Canada, 1981–2008. Int. J. Circumpolar Health. 2012;71(1):17520.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. Villalobos A, Rojas-Martínez R, Aguilar-Salinas CA, Romero-Martínez M, Mendoza-Alvarado LR, MDL F-L, et al. Atención médica y acciones de autocuidado en personas que viven con diabetes, según nivel socioeconómico. Salud Publica Mex. 2019;61:876–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. McLeod S, Verdon S, Bennetts KL. Celebrating young indigenous Australian children's speech and language competence. Early Child Res Q. 2014;29(2):118–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  162. Myers T. Culture and sexual practices in response to HIV among Aboriginal people living on-reserve in Ontario. Cult Health Sex. 1999;1(1):19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  163. Hubert C, Villalobos A, Suárez-López L. Cambios en el calendario de uso de condón masculino en la primera y última relación sexual en distintas cohortes de mujeres. Salud Publica Mex. 2020;62(1):105–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  164. Moreno-Montoya J, Alvarez-Nemegyei J, Sanin LH, Pérez-Barbosa L, Trejo-Valdivia B, Santana N, et al. Association of regional and cultural factors with the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in the Mexican population: a multilevel analysis. Clin. Rheumatol. 2015;21(2):57–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Díaz-Olavarrieta C, Wilson KS, García SG, Revollo R, Richmond K, Paz F, et al. The co-occurrence of intimate partner violence and syphilis among pregnant women in Bolivia. J Women's Health. 2009;18(12):2077–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  166. Condon JR, Cunningham J, Barnes T, Armstrong BK, Selva-Nayagam S. Cancer diagnosis and treatment in the Northern Territory: assessing health service performance for indigenous Australians. Intern Med J. 2006;36(8):498–505.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  167. Canales MK, Rakowski W, Howard A. Traditionality and cancer screening practices among American Indian women in Vermont. Health Care Women Int. 2007;28(2):155–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. de Souza RJ, Bilodeau NM, Gordon K, Davis AD, Stearns JC, Cranmer-Byng M, et al. Entsisewata’karí: teke (you will be healthy again): clinical outcomes of returning to a traditional Haudenosaunee diet. Int. J. Indig. Health. 2021;16(2):82–119.

    Google Scholar 

  169. Lewis ME, Volpert-Esmond HI, Deen JF, Modde E, Warne D. Stress and cardiometabolic disease risk for indigenous populations throughout the lifespan. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(4/1821):1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  170. Gone JP, Calf Looking PE. American Indian culture as substance abuse treatment: pursuing evidence for a local intervention. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2011;43:291–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  171. Donovan DM, Thomas LR, Sigo RLW, Price L, Lonczak H, Lawrence N, et al. Healing of the canoe: preliminary results of a culturally tailored intervention to prevent substance abuse and promote tribal identity for native youth in two Pacific northwest tribes. Am Indian Alsk Native Ment Health Res. 2015;22(1):42–76.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  172. JKA K, Mabellos T, Ahn HJ, Choi SY, Wills TA, Seto TB. A cultural dance program improves hypertension control and cardiovascular disease risk in Native Hawaiians: A randomized controlled trial. Ann Behav Med. 2021;20:1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  173. Corscadden L, Levesque JF, Lewis V, Strumpf E, Breton M, Russell G. Factors associated with multiple barriers to access to primary care: an international analysis. Int. J. Equity Health. 2018;17(1(28)):1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  174. Sarche M, Spicer P. Poverty and health disparities for American Indian and Alaska native children: current knowledge and future prospects. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1136:126–36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  175. Cloutier E, Langlet É. Aboriginal Peoples Survey, 2012: Concepts and methods guide. Ottawa: Statistics Canada; 2014. Contract No.: Catalogue no. 89-653-X — No. 002. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-653-x/89-653-x2013002-eng.htm.

  176. Unger JB, Soto C, Baezconde-Garbanati L. Perceptions of ceremonial and nonceremonial uses of tobacco by American-Indian adolescents in California. J Adolesc Health. 2006;38(4):443.e9–e16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  177. Ryman TK, Boyer BB, Hopkins SE, Philip J, Thompson B, Beresford SAA, et al. Association between iq’mik smokeless tobacco use and cardiometabolic risk profile among Yup’ik Alaska native people. Ethn Health. 2018;23(5):488–502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  178. Wilson WH, Kamanā K. The Hakalama: the ʻAha Pūnana Leo’s syllabic Hawaiian Reading program. In: McLachlan CJ, Arrow AW, editors. Literacy in the early years. Singapore: Springer; 2017. p. 133–50.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  179. Bliss H, Creed M. Costing models for language maintenance, revitalization, and reclamation in Canada. First Peoples' Cultural Council: Brentwood Bay; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  180. Cherokee Nation passes historic nearly $3b budget 2021 [Available from: https://www.anadisgoi.com/index.php/government-stories/689-cherokee-nation-passes-historic-nearly-3b-budget.

  181. May PA, Serna P, Hurt L, Bruyn D. Outcome evaluation of a public health approach to suicide prevention in an American Indian tribal nation. Am J Public Health. 2005;95:1238–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  182. Littledoe J. Wampanoag language reclamation project: first steps to healing the circle. Boston: Thirtieth Algonquian Conference; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  183. Hinton L, Meek BA. Language revitalization in indigenous North America. In: Hinton L, Huss L, Roche G, editors. The Routledge handbook of language revitalization. New York: Routledge; 2018. p. 375–83.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  184. Office of Minority Health Resource Center. Mental and Behavioral Health - American Indians/Alaska Natives 2021 [Available from: https://www.minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=4&lvlid=39.

  185. Doria CM, Momper SL, Burrage RL. “Togetherness:” the role of intergenerational and cultural engagement in urban American Indian and Alaskan native youth suicide prevention. J Ethn Cult Divers Soc Work. 2021;30(1-2):104–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  186. Allen J, Wexler L, Rasmus S. Protective factors as a unifying framework for strength-based intervention and culturally responsive American Indian and Alaska native suicide prevention. Prev Sci. 2022;23(1):59–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  187. Cwik M, Goklish N, Masten K, Lee A, Suttle R, Alchesay M, et al. “Let our Apache heritage and culture live on forever and teach the young ones”: development of the elders’ resilience curriculum, an upstream suicide prevention approach for American Indian youth. Am J Community Psychol. 2019;64(1-2):137–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Harvey Cushing / John Hay Whitney Medical Library Cross-Departmental Team, including Vermetha Polite and Dorota Peglow, assisted in the retrieval of full text in this project. We thank Daryl Baldwin, Linda Mayes and Peggy Mainor for helpful comments.

Funding

The authors report no funding supported this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Endangered Language Fund, 300 George St., Suite 900, New Haven, CT, 06511, USA

    D. H. Whalen

  2. Department of Family & Community Medicine, University of Missouri School of Medicine, MA301 Medical Sciences Bldg, Columbia, MO, 65212, USA

    Melissa E. Lewis

  3. Yale Child Study Center, 230 South Frontage Road, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA

    Stefanie Gillson

  4. School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen’s University, 28 Division Street, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada

    Brittany McBeath

  5. Program in Anthropology, CUNY Graduate Center, 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Bri Alexander

  6. Cushing/Whitney Medical Library, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA

    Kate Nyhan

Authors
  1. D. H. Whalen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melissa E. Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefanie Gillson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Brittany McBeath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bri Alexander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kate Nyhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

DHW designed the study. All authors contributed to the study protocol. KN developed the search strategy with input from DHW and conducted the search of the bibliographic databases. DHW, MEL, SG, BM and BA screened the search results and conducted the analysis. DHW drafted the first version of the manuscript. All authors made additions and changes to the manuscript, and read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. H. Whalen.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Whalen, D.H., Lewis, M.E., Gillson, S. et al. Health effects of Indigenous language use and revitalization: a realist review. Int J Equity Health 21, 169 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01782-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01782-6

Keywords

  • Language use
  • Language revitalization
  • Health
  • Indigenous
  • Realist review

International Journal for Equity in Health

ISSN: 1475-9276

Contact us