ArticleBMC public health2015
No one's discussing the elephant in the room: contemplating questions of research impact and benefit in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian health research.
Article in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
84 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 271 citations in OpenAlex.
- The cultural safety of research reports on primary healthcare use by Indigenous Peoples: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Discharge interventions for First Nations people with a chronic condition or injury: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- The epidemiology of superficial Streptococcal A (impetigo and pharyngitis) infections in Australia: A systematic review.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Family-centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood well-being by primary healthcare services.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Where do we stand? The availability and efficacy of diabetes related foot health programs for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: a systematic review.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2019Pooled it
- Assessing the impact of healthcare research: A systematic review of methodological frameworks.PLoS medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Does Indigenous health research have impact? A systematic review of reviews.International journal for equity in health · 2017Pooled it
- Perceived barriers and enablers to participation in a community-tailored physical activity program with Indigenous Australians in a regional and rural setting: a qualitative study.International journal for equity in health · 2017Trial
- Development of Cracks in the Ice Resources for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, a Culturally Appropriate Evidence-Based Online Community Toolkit About Crystal Methamphetamine: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Utilizing Aboriginal Participatory Action Research-Dadirri-Ganma to Co-Design the Deadly Dental Home.Qualitative health research · 2026Article
- Practical Application of Ethical Research Principles: Developing and Implementing Grassroots Food Security Research With the Yarrabah Aboriginal Community.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026Article
- Non-Indigenous Public Health Educators' Readiness to Engage With Aboriginal Elders and Knowledge-Holders: A Baseline Study Informing Indigenous-Led Consultation.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026Article
- Indigenous Culture and Health in UDRH Research: An Indigenous-Led Narrative Review.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026Review
- Working Right Ways in Foot Health With and for First Nations Peoples: Research Method Guided and Governed by First Nations Ways of Knowing, Being, and Doing in Cross-Sectional Qualitative Study Design.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2026Article
- Introducing "Visual bibliographies" as a novel tool for communicating complexity: a knowledge translation case study from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary health care research.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the research capacity and culture within the allied health workforce in Northern New South Wales Local Health District: a cross-sectional observational study.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Sugar-sweetened beverages and water intake among Indigenous youth in the United States and Canada: a scoping review of interventions.International journal of circumpolar health · 2025Article
- Evaluating the impact of the 'Blow, Breathe, Cough' health promotion intervention in resolving otitis media with effusion in children: An adaptive randomized-controlled trial protocol.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025Article
- Article
- Accepting the Legitimacy of Difference: Tools to Support the Decolonisation of Human Research Ethics in Western Health Research.Nursing open · 2025Review
24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere remains a concern that Indigenous Australians have been over-researched without corresponding improvements in their health; this trend is applicable to most Indigenous populations globally. This debate article has a dual purpose: 1) to open a frank conversation about the value of research to Indigenous Australian populations; and 2) to stimulate ways of thinking about potential resolutions to the lack of progress made in the Indigenous research benefit debate. DISCUSSION: Capturing the meaning of research benefit takes the form of ethical value-oriented methodological considerations in the decision-making processes of Indigenous research endeavours. Because research practices come from Western knowledge bases, attaining such positions in research means reconciling both Indigenous and Western knowledge systems to produce new methodologies that guide planning, evaluating and monitoring of research practices as necessary. Increasingly, more sophisticated performance measures have been implemented to ensure academic impact and benefits are captured. Assessing societal and other non-academic impacts and benefits however, has not been accorded corresponding attention. Research reform has only focussed on research translation in more recent years. The research impact debate must take account of the various standards of accountability (to whom), impact priorities (for whom), positive and negative impacts, and biases that operate in describing impact and measuring benefit. SUMMARY: A perennial question in Indigenous research discourse is whether the abundance of research conducted; purportedly to improve health, is justified and benefits Indigenous people in ways that are meaningful and valued by them. Different research stakeholders have different conceptions of the value and nature of research, its conduct, what it should achieve and the kinds of benefits expected. We need to work collaboratively and listen more closely to the voice of Indigenous Australians to better understand, demonstrate and measure health research benefits. The authors conclude that as an imperative, a systematic benefit assessment strategy that includes identification of research priorities and planning, monitoring and evaluation components needs to be developed and implemented across research projects. In Indigenous health research, this will often mean adopting a benefit-led approach by changing the way research is done and preferencing alternative research methodologies. As a point of departure to improving impact and reaching mutually beneficial outcomes for researchers and partners in Indigenous health research, we need to routinise the assessment of benefit from outset of research as one of the standards toward which we work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.