SynthesisInternational journal for equity in health2017
Does Indigenous health research have impact? A systematic review of reviews.
Synthesis in International journal for equity in health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The cultural safety of research reports on primary healthcare use by Indigenous Peoples: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Risk, protective, and biomarkers of dementia in Indigenous peoples: A systematic review.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Pooled it
- Beyond enrolments: a systematic review exploring the factors affecting the retention of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health students in the tertiary education system.International journal for equity in health · 2019Pooled it
- Where to Next for Māori Health Research Review Processes? Insights Into the Indigenous Context: An Integrative Systematic Literature Review.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2026Review
- Indigenous Culture and Health in UDRH Research: An Indigenous-Led Narrative Review.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026Review
- Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations Leading the Way in Child Health Research.Journal of community health · 2025Article
- Our Health Counts: Nothing about us without us in our right to be counted.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2024Article
- Climate change, biodiversity loss, and Indigenous Peoples' health and wellbeing: a systematic umbrella review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- From Deficit to Strength-Based Aboriginal Health Research-Moving toward Flourishing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Mapping the knowledge structure and trends in Australian Indigenous health and wellbeing research from 2003 to 2022: a scientometric analysis.Frontiers in sociology · 2023Article
- Cultural Proficiency in First Nations Health Research: A Mixed-Methods, Cross-Cultural Evaluation of a Novel Resource.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Knowledge Translation and Implementation Planning to Promote Research Governance in Nongovernment Organizations in the Torres Strait: Descriptive Study.Interactive journal of medical research · 2022Article
- Interrogating the intentions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health: a narrative review of research outputs since the introduction of Closing the Gap.The Medical journal of Australia · 2022Review
- Landscape of clinical trial activity focusing on Indigenous health in Australia: an overview using clinical trial registry data from 2008-2018.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Indigenous health equity in health register ascertainment and data quality: a narrative review.International journal for equity in health · 2022Review
- "We are not stray leaves blowing about in the wind": exploring the impact of Family Wellbeing empowerment research, 1998-2021.International journal for equity in health · 2022Review
- The Incidence of Stroke in Indigenous Populations of Countries With a Very High Human Development Index: A Systematic Review Protocol.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- '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.The Australian journal of rural health · 2020Article
- Wide-Scale Continuous Quality Improvement: A Study of Stakeholders' Use of Quality of Care Reports at Various System Levels, and Factors Mediating Use.Frontiers in public health · 2018Article
- Validation and Factor Analysis of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure for Indigenous Australian Boarding School Students.Frontiers in public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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.
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.