ArticleAustralian and New Zealand journal of public health2021
A discourse analysis of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander COVID-19 policy response.
Article in Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in First Nations peoples: a systematic review.Global health action · 2024Pooled it
- Exposing Deficit Discourse in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples' Ageing Policy: Promoting Healthy Ageing for Our Elders.Australasian journal on ageing · 2026Article
- Primary health care utilisation and delivery in remote Australian clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- More than meets the eye: a critical discourse analysis of a Swedish health system reform.BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse the implicit discourses within the COVID-19 policy response for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander remote communities.
methodThis paper uses Bacchi's 'What is the Problem Represented to Be' framework to analyse the Emergency Requirements for Remote Communities Determination under Subsection 477(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (Cth).
resultsDespite the leadership of community-controlled health services and regional councils, and the actions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, the policy response constructs Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as vulnerable and mobility as a problem that needs a law and order response.
conclusionsThe policy response perpetuates an ongoing paternalistic discourse where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people must be controlled for the sake of their health, informed by notions of Indigeneity as deficient. This stands in contrast with the work of community-controlled health organisations, advocacy by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people for and against restrictions, and examples of communities protecting themselves. Implications for public health: Unilateral government intervention creates limiting discourses of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. In contrast, ongoing COVID-19 responses can build on the strengths of and work done by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families, leaders, and communities.
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.