Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33441334›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2021

Principles guiding ethical research in a collaboration to strengthen Indigenous primary healthcare in Australia: learning from experience.

Jodie Bailie, Alison Frances Laycock, Kathleen Parker Conte, Veronica Matthews, David Peiris, Ross Stewart Bailie, Seye Abimbola, Megan Elizabeth Passey, Frances Clare Cunningham, Kerryn Harkin and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

11 authors.

Jodie BailieUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia jodie.bailie@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-4393-5773
Alison Frances LaycockUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7756-4398
Kathleen Parker ConteUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5429-429X
Veronica MatthewsUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1319-257X
David PeirisThe School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6898-3870
Ross Stewart BailieUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5966-3368
Seye AbimbolaThe School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1294-3850
Megan Elizabeth PasseyUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5766-0235
Frances Clare CunninghamMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9783-9165
Kerryn HarkinUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.
Roxanne Gwendalyn BainbridgeCentre for Indigenous Health Equity Research, Central Queensland University, Cairns, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1206-8072

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIndigenous communities worldwide are leading calls for all research involving Indigenous people to be underpinned by values and principles articulated by them. Many researchers are explicitly adopting these principles to guide what, where, how and when research is undertaken with Indigenous people. With critical reflection to support the implementation of such principles largely absent from published literature, this paper explores both the implementation of, and the outcomes from a set of guiding principles used in a large-scale Australian research collaboration to improve Indigenous health.

methodsIn this inductive qualitative study, we adopted a principles-focused evaluation approach. Based on interviews with 35 actors in the collaboration and a review of project documents, we generated themes that were then iteratively discussed, refined and categorised into (1) 'strategies'-activities by which implementation of our guiding principles were recognised; (2) 'outcomes'-results seen from implementing the principles and (3) 'conditions'-aspects of the context that facilitated and constrained implementation of the principles.

resultsRespondents found it difficult to articulate how the guiding principles were actually implemented, and frequently referred to them as part of the fabric of the collaboration. They viewed the set of principles as mutually reinforcing, and as providing a rudder for navigating complexity and conflict. Implementation of the principles occurred through five strategies-honouring the principles; being dynamic and adaptable; sharing and dispersing leadership; collaborating purposefully and adopting a culture of mutual learning. Outcomes included increased Indigenous leadership and participation; the ability to attract principled and values-driven researchers and stakeholders, and the development of trusting and respectful relationships. The conditions that facilitated the implementation of the principles were collaborating over time; an increasing number of Indigenous researchers and taking an 'innovation platform' approach.

conclusionOur findings show that principles guiding collaborations are valuable in providing a focus, direction and a way of working together when they are collaboratively developed, hold genuine meaning for all members and are implemented within a culture of continuous critical reflection, learning and adaptation, with ongoing reinterpretation of the principles over time.

Indexed as

Ethics, ResearchPrimary Health CareAustraliaHumansQualitative Researchhealth policyhealth services researchhealth systemshealth systems evaluationqualitative study

Identifiers

PMID33441334
PMCPMC7812086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.