Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25652186›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2015

Supporting aboriginal knowledge and practice in health care: lessons from a qualitative evaluation of the strong women, strong babies, strong culture program.

Anne Lowell, Sue Kildea, Marlene Liddle, Barbara Cox, Barbara Paterson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Evaluating the Tidda Talk Program: A Culturally Relevant Approach to Assessing Social and Emotional Wellbeing in Young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anne LowellResearch Centre for Health and Wellbeing, Charles Darwin University, Ellengowan Drive, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia. anne.lowell@cdu.edu.au.
Sue KildeaMidwifery Research Unit, Mater Research Institute, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. sue.kildea@mater.uq.edu.au.
Marlene LiddleStrong Women, Strong Babies, Strong Culture Program Coordinator, Department of Health, Northern Territory Government, Darwin, NT, Australia. Marlene.liddle@nt.gov.au.
Barbara CoxStrong Women, Strong Babies, Strong Culture Program Coordinator, Department of Health, Northern Territory Government, Darwin, NT, Australia. Barbara.Cox@nt.gov.au.
Barbara PatersonDepartment of Health, Northern Territory Government, Darwin, NT, Australia. Barbara.Paterson@outlook.com.
Government of the Northern Territory · AUCharles Darwin University · AUUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Strong Women, Strong Babies, Strong Culture Program (the Program) evolved from a recognition of the value of Aboriginal knowledge and practice in promoting maternal and child health (MCH) in remote communities of the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia. Commencing in 1993 it continues to operate today. In 2008, the NT Department of Health commissioned an evaluation to identify enabling factors and barriers to successful implementation of the Program, and to identify potential pathways for future development. In this paper we focus on the evaluation findings related specifically to the role of Aborignal cultural knowledge and practice within the Program.

methodsA qualitative evaluation utilised purposive sampling to maximise diversity in program history and Aboriginal culture. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 76 participants were recorded in their preferred language with a registered Interpreter when required. Thematic analysis of data was verified or modified through further discussions with participants and members of the evaluation team.

resultsAlthough the importance of Aboriginal knowledge and practice as a fundamental component of the Program is widely acknowledged, there has been considerable variation across time and location in the extent to which these cultural dimensions have been included in practice. Factors contributing to this variation are complex and relate to a number of broad themes including: location of control over Program activities; recognition and respect for Aboriginal knowledge and practice as a legitimate component of health care; working in partnership; communication within and beyond the Program; access to transport and working space; and governance and organisational support.

conclusionsWe suggest that inclusion of Aboriginal knowledge and practice as a fundamental component of the Program is key to its survival over more than twenty years despite serious challenges. Respect for the legitimacy of Aboriginal knowledge and practice within health care, a high level of community participation and control supported through effective governance and sufficient organisational commitment as well as competence in intercultural collaborative practice of health staff are critical requirements for realising the potential for cultural knowledge and practice to improve Aboriginal health outcomes.

Indexed as

Health Services, IndigenousAustraliaChildChild HealthChild Health ServicesCultural CompetencyFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaternal-Child Health ServicesPregnancyProgram EvaluationQuality Assurance, Health CareQuality ImprovementWomen's HealthWomen's Health Services

Identifiers

PMID25652186
PMCPMC4328040
OpenAlexW2162451297

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.