Suppr超能文献

原住民健康研究是否具有影响力?系统评价综述。

Does Indigenous health research have impact? A systematic review of reviews.

机构信息

Centre for Indigenous Health Equity Research, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Psychology and Public Health Department, CQUniversity Australia, Cairns Square, Corner Abbott and Shields Streets, Cairns, Qld, 4870, Australia.

The Cairns Institute, James Cook University, Building D3, Smithfield, Qld, 4870, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Equity Health. 2017 Mar 21;16(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s12939-017-0548-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Aboriginal 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.

METHODS

Fourteen 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.

RESULTS

Seventy-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.

CONCLUSIONS

The 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.

摘要

背景

澳大利亚原住民和托雷斯海峡岛民(以下简称原住民)声称,他们的研究过多,但没有相应的研究收益。这一说法提出了两个问题。第一个问题在一定程度上已经在文献中有所涉及,即哪种类型的研究更有可能为原住民带来收益。第二个问题是研究人员如何报告他们的研究对原住民的影响。本项针对原住民健康的系统评价旨在探讨第二个问题。

方法

系统检索了 14 个电子数据库中符合入选标准的原住民健康评价。两名评审员使用预先制定的方案评估了它们的特征和方法学严谨性。提出并检验了三个研究假设:(1)评价能够满足原住民健康的优先需求;(2)评价采用最佳实践指南,在方法学透明度和严谨性方面,以及研究实施对原住民的可接受性和适宜性方面,进行研究报告;(3)评价明确报告纳入研究的增量影响以及研究转化。我们认为,如果综述作者明确解决这三个假设中的每一个,那么研究对原住民健康的影响就会得到阐明。

结果

共纳入 76 项评价,包括 55 篇期刊文章和 21 项澳大利亚政府委托的证据评价报告。尽管评价在原住民健康研究中越来越受到重视和认可,数量、广度和复杂性都在增加,但对原住民健康研究影响的报告却很少。这一发现引发了人们对这些评价对原住民的相关性、对政策和实践的影响以及评价的委托、报告和评估方式的质疑。

结论

本研究的结果有两个主要目的。首先,我们确定了在记录原住民健康研究影响方面存在的知识和方法学差距,研究人员和政策制定者可以针对这些差距采取行动。其次,这些发现为开发一个框架提供了依据,该框架允许研究人员和资助机构构建未来的原住民健康研究,以改善报告和随时间推移评估影响的能力。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1a9/5361858/c53c647b521b/12939_2017_548_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验