Does Indigenous health research have impact? A systematic review of reviews

Abstract

BackgroundAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians (hereafter respectfully Indigenous Australians) claim that they have been over-researched without corresponding research benefit. This claim raises two questions. The first, which has been covered to some extent in the literature, is about what type(s) of research are likely to achieve benefits for Indigenous people. The second is how researchers report the impact of their research for Indigenous people. This systematic review of Indigenous health reviews addresses the second enquiry.MethodsFourteen electronic databases were systematically searched for Indigenous health reviews which met eligibility criteria. Two reviewers assessed their characteristics and methodological rigour using an a priori protocol. Three research hypotheses were stated and tested: (1) reviews address Indigenous health priority needs; (2) reviews adopt best practice guidelines on research conduct and reporting in respect to methodological transparency and rigour, as well as acceptability and appropriateness of research implementation to Indigenous people; and (3) reviews explicitly report the incremental impacts of the included studies and translation of research. We argue that if review authors explicitly address each of these three hypotheses, then the impact of research for Indigenous peoples’ health would be explicated.ResultsSeventy-six reviews were included; comprising 55 journal articles and 21 Australian Government commissioned evidence review reports. While reviews are gaining prominence and recognition in Indigenous health research and increasing in number, breadth and complexity, there is little reporting of the impact of health research for Indigenous people. This finding raises questions about the relevance of these reviews for Indigenous people, their impact on policy and practice and how reviews have been commissioned, reported and evaluated.ConclusionsThe findings of our study serve two main purposes. First, we have identified knowledge and methodological gaps in documenting Indigenous health research impact that can be addressed by researchers and policy makers. Second, the findings provide the justification for developing a framework allowing researchers and funding bodies to structure future Indigenous health research to improve the reporting and assessment of impact over time.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-017-0548-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

‘We walked side by side through the whole thing’: A mixed‐methods study of key elements of community‐based participatory research partnerships between rural Aboriginal communities and researchers

“…Building trust between researchers and communities is an essential element of ethical research with Aboriginal people 14,17,20 and partnerships more generally 30,34 . Mistrust towards researchers can exist in Aboriginal communities because of past research that has provided little or no direct benefits to, or even harmed, the participating communities 33,35‐37 . Initial mistrust existed in rural Aboriginal communities in this study, but integrating processes and actions with direct benefit to the community helped build the trust in the partnerships and broader community.…”

Validation and Factor Analysis of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure for Indigenous Australian Boarding School Students

“…There are a range of survey instruments available internationally to measure resilience for both the general population and youth ( 9 – 11 ). However, they are rarely or inconsistently used to inform decision-making in health and education services for Indigenous youth ( 12 ) for reasons that include: concerns about risk based questions and their potential impact on students; lack of resourcing for services to conduct intervention-based research; concerns over the capacity to respond to mental health issues raised by the instrument, and; concerns over the appropriateness and relevance of international instruments for utility with Indigenous Australian youth ( 13 ). The suitability of international instruments for use with Indigenous Australian youth is also linked to broader concerns of data sovereignty—the production, ownership, and use of Indigenous data—and the cultural appropriateness of using standard measures in Indigenous contexts ( 14 , 15 ).…”

The Development of a Survey Instrument to Assess Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Students’ Resilience and Risk for Self-Harm

“…Although there is a range of survey instruments available internationally to measure resilience and risk, our literature search, and workshops suggested that the instruments are rarely or inconsistently used to inform the decision making of education and health services (Kinchin et al, 2017). This might be because of a reluctance by education and health professionals to ask risk-based questions because of valid fears about students' vulnerability, such as we found in this study.…”