Evidence Hub

Assessing the gaps in cardiovascular disease risk assessment and management in primary care for Māori and Pacific peoples in Aotearoa New Zealand— a systematic review

Annaliese Wheeler, J. Rahiri, Rochelle Ellison-Lupena, S. Hanchard, K. Brewer, J. Paynter, Julie Winter-Smith, V. Selak et al.

The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific, 2025

9 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Māori and Pacific peoples carry the highest burden of cardiovascular disease in New Zealand (NZ). This systematic review aimed to determine access to evidence-based cardiovascular disease risk assessment (CVDRA) and management in primary care for Māori and Pacific peoples compared with other ethnicities in NZ, as well as factors contributing to reduced access. Methods In this systematic review with a narrative synthesis, keywords related to Māori and Pacific peoples, cardiovascular disease, and primary care were used to search MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, NZresearch.org, National Library Catalogue (Te Puna), Index New Zealand (INNZ), and Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre, grey literature and hand search sources from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2024. Two reviewers screened texts and three reviewers extracted data and assessed quality. High quality was defined using Western (Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, MMAT, ≥80% compliance) and Indigenous (CONSolIDated critERtia for strengthening the reporting of health research involving Indigenous Peoples, CONSIDER) research tools. The protocol for this systematic review was registered at: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VUDE9. Findings A total of 2765 texts were identified of which 69 were included. This review identified inadequate levels of CVDRA in Māori and Pacific peoples when measured against the 90% national target. While the provision of primary prevention medications was higher…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free