College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland, Australia.
Monash Children's Hospital, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
PLoS One. 2023 Sep 8;18(9):e0291141. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291141. eCollection 2023.
This mixed studies review assessed the extent of the literature related to approaches used to develop new tools that screen for distress in Indigenous adults globally. It answered the research question: What qualitative and quantitative approaches are used to develop new screening tools that assess distress in Indigenous peoples globally? CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, Medline, PsychInfo and Scopus databases were systematically searched to identify relevant articles published between January 2000 and February 2023. Articles describing the development of a new screening tool for Indigenous peoples, globally, published in English since 2000 and constituted a full publication of primary research, met the inclusion criteria. Studies underwent quality appraisal using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. A sequential exploratory design guided data analysis. Synthesis occurred using a two-phase sequential method. Nineteen articles constituted the data set. Articles described the use of qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods in approximately equal numbers. Overall, qualitative methods were used in early stages of tool development, with mixed and quantitative methods used to pilot and validate them. However, most studies did not follow the theoretical guidelines for tool development, and while validation studies took place in over half of the data set, none adequately assessed construct validity. Sixty percent of the articles were located using citation searches, which suggests database searches were ineffective. Valid tools that screen for distress in Indigenous populations support equitable access to health care. This review found that most screening tools were developed in Australia. However, additional evidence of their validity is needed in addition to a valid diagnostic tool that supports the determination of criterion validity. These needs present important future research opportunities.
本混合研究综述评估了全球范围内用于开发新工具以筛查原住民成年人痛苦的文献程度。它回答了研究问题：用于开发新的全球原住民人群痛苦筛查工具的定性和定量方法有哪些？系统检索了 CINAHL、Embase、Emcare、Medline、PsychInfo 和 Scopus 数据库，以确定 2000 年 1 月至 2023 年 2 月期间发表的相关文章。描述了全球原住民人群新筛查工具开发的文章，发表在 2000 年以后的英语文章，且为主要研究的完整出版物，符合纳入标准。使用混合方法评估工具对研究进行质量评估。采用顺序探索性设计指导数据分析。使用两阶段顺序方法进行综合。19 篇文章构成了数据集。文章描述了定性、定量或混合方法的使用大致相同。总体而言，定性方法在工具开发的早期阶段使用，混合和定量方法用于试点和验证。然而，大多数研究没有遵循工具开发的理论指南，虽然半数以上的数据集中都进行了验证研究，但没有一个充分评估结构有效性。60%的文章是通过引文搜索找到的，这表明数据库搜索效果不佳。有效的筛查原住民人群痛苦的工具可以支持公平获得医疗保健。本综述发现，大多数筛查工具是在澳大利亚开发的。然而，除了支持确定标准有效性的有效诊断工具外，还需要更多关于其有效性的证据。这些需求为未来的重要研究提供了机会。
