Lowitja Funded Research
Permanent URI for this collection
The Lowitja Institute is committed to investing in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-driven health research that privileges Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. The Lowitja Institute's investment upholds Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights to sovereignty and self-determination throughout all stages of the research process and within the health research workforce. This collection features research funded by the Lowitja Institute and its predecessors, encompassing community-led studies and publications by researchers affiliated with the Lowitja Institute.
Submit a publication to the Respository.
Submit a publication to the Respository.
Browse
Browsing Lowitja Funded Research by Author "Anderson K."
Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's domains of wellbeing: a comprehensive literature review.(2019-06-15) Butler T.L.; Anderson K.; Garvey G.; Cunningham J.; Ratcliffe J.; Tong A.; Whop L.J.; Cass A.; Dickson M.; Howard K.There are significant health and social disparities between the world's Indigenous and non-Indigenous people on factors likely to influence quality of life (QOL) and wellbeing. However, these disparities in wellbeing are not captured in conventional QOL instruments, as they often do not include dimensions that are likely to be relevant to Indigenous people. The objective of this comprehensive literature review was to identify these wellbeing domains for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia (hereafter, respectfully referred to collectively as Indigenous Australians). We searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Econlit, CINAHL, and Embase (from inception to June 2017, and updated in March 2019), and grey literature sources using keywords relating to adult Indigenous Australians' QOL and wellbeing. From 278 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 95 were included in a thematic analysis. This synthesis revealed nine broad interconnected wellbeing dimensions: autonomy, empowerment and recognition; family and community; culture, spirituality and identity; Country; basic needs; work, roles and responsibilities; education; physical health; and mental health. The findings suggest domains of wellbeing relevant to and valued by Indigenous Australians that may not be included in existing QOL and wellbeing instruments, domains that may be shared with Indigenous populations globally. This indicates the need for a tailored wellbeing instrument that includes factors relevant to Indigenous Australians. Developing such an instrument will ensure meaningful, culturally-relevant measurement of Indigenous Australians' wellbeing.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier LtdItem Development of a national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer framework: a shared process to guide effective policy and practice.(2018-05-19) Brands J.; Garvey G.; Anderson K.; Cunningham J.; Chynoweth J.; Wallington I.; Morris B.; Knott V.; Webster S.; Kinsella L.; Condon J.; Zorbas H.Indigenous Australians experience a substantially higher cancer mortality rate than non-Indigenous Australians. While cancer outcomes are improving for non-Indigenous Australians, they are worsening for Indigenous Australians. Reducing this disparity requires evidence-based and culturally-appropriate guidance. The purpose of this paper is to describe an initiative by Cancer Australia and Menzies School of Health Research (Menzies) to develop Australia's first National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Framework using a process of co-design with relevant stakeholders. The initiative was guided by three core principles: achieving policy-relevant evidence-based outcomes; engaging and maintaining trust with Indigenous Australians at every phase; and employing best-practice and appropriate research methods. Four components of research comprised the Framework development: evidence review; multifaceted stakeholder consultation and input; triangulation of findings; and direct stakeholder input in drafting and refining the Framework. The evidence review confirmed the increasing burden of cancer on Indigenous Australians, while stakeholder consultations facilitated comprehensive input from those with lived experience. The consultations revealed issues not identified in existing literature, and gave different emphases of priority, thus reinforcing the value of including stakeholder perspectives. This paper focuses primarily on documenting the methods used; findings are presented only in order to illustrate the results of the process. The published Framework is available at www.canceraustralia.gov.au; further description and analyses of findings from the consultations will be published elsewhere. The logistics inherent in large-scale consultation are considerable. However, the quality of data and the foundation for sustained partnership with stakeholders and knowledge translation vastly outweighed the challenges. The process of wide-ranging stakeholder consultation described in this paper offers a model for other areas of national and international Indigenous priority setting and policy and practice development that meets the needs of those most affected. The Framework, through the establishment of an agreed, shared and evidence-based agenda, provides guidance for jurisdictional cancer plans, optimal care pathways, and program and service planning for the multiple players across all levels of the health system.Copyright © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.Item Development of the What Matters 2 Adults (WM2A) wellbeing measure for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults.Howard K.; Garvey G.; Anderson K.; Dickson M.; Viney R.; Ratcliffe J.; Howell M.; Gall A.; Cunningham J.; Whop L.J.; Cass A.; Jaure A.; Mulhern B.Purpose: As wellbeing is culturally bound, wellbeing measures for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples must be culturally relevant and grounded in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander values and preferences. We describe the development of a nationally-relevant and culturally grounded wellbeing measure for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults: the What Matters to Adults (WM2A) measure. Methods: We used a mixed methods approach to measure development, combining Indigenist methodologies and psychometric methods. Candidate items were derived through a large national qualitative study. Think-aloud interviews (n = 17) were conducted to assess comprehension, acceptability, and wording of candidate items. Two national surveys collected data on the item pool (n = 312, n = 354). Items were analysed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and item response theory (IRT) to test dimensionality, local dependence and item fit. A Collaborative Yarning approach ensured Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices were privileged throughout. Results: Fifty candidate items were developed, refined, and tested. Using EFA, an eight factor model was developed. All items met pre-specified thresholds for maximum endorsement frequencies, and floor and ceiling effects; no item redundancy was identified. Ten items did not meet thresholds for aggregate adjacent endorsement frequencies. During Collaborative Yarning, six items were removed based on low factor loadings (<0.4) and twelve due to conceptual overlap, high correlations with other items, endorsement frequencies, and/or low IRT item level information. Several items were retained for content validity. The final measure includes 32 items across 10 domains (Balance & control; Hope & resilience; Caring for others; Culture & Country; Spirit & identity; Feeling valued; Connection with others; Access; Racism & worries; Pride & strength). Conclusions: The unique combination of Indigenist and psychometric methodologies to develop WM2A ensures a culturally and psychometrically robust measure, relevant across a range of settings and applications. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)Item Exploring traditional and complementary medicine use by Indigenous Australian women undergoing gynaecological cancer investigations.(2019-06-19) Gall A.; Anderson K.; Diaz A.; Matthews V.; Adams J.; Taylor T.; Garvey G.Background: Indigenous Australian women experience worse gynaecological cancer outcomes than non-Indigenous women. While traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) is increasingly used by cancer patients alongside conventional treatments, little is known about T&CM use by Indigenous women. This study aimed to explore the beliefs, attitudes and experiences related to T&CM use and disclosure among Indigenous women undergoing gynaecological cancer investigations. Method(s): A mixed-methods design explored T&CM use among Indigenous women who presented for gynaecological cancer investigation at an urban Queensland hospital (September 2016 and January 2018). Result(s): Fourteen women participated. The reported use (86%) and perceived value of T&CM was high among the participants, however, women reported major challenges in communicating with healthcare providers about T&CM, commonly associated with trust and rapport. Conclusion(s): These findings highlight the need for strategies to facilitate culturally-appropriate doctor-patient communication around T&CM to foster trust and transparency in gynaecological cancer care for Indigenous women. Copyright © 2019Item Identifying research priorities to improve cancer control for Indigenous Australians.(2017-10-26) Morris B.A.; Anderson K.; Cunningham J.; Garvey G.Objectives: The cancer burden is high among Australia's Indigenous population. Following a period of increasing attention by researchers, policy makers and consumers, this study aimed to identify emerging research priorities in Indigenous cancer control. Method(s): A survey was administered to a network of individuals with an interest in cancer and Indigenous Australians. Respondents (N = 255) described what they thought was the most significant research priority for cancer control for Indigenous Australians and ranked prespecified research areas relating to components of the cancer continuum. Result(s): Identified research priorities included cancer prevention and early detection; health literacy; and culturally appropriate care for Indigenous patients, survivors and families. Community engagement, Indigenous ownership, and partnership and collaboration were highlighted as critical elements underpinning research. Conclusion(s): The identified research priorities, along with seminal documents such as the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Framework, provide a roadmap for developing, funding, implementing and translating research to reduce the burden of cancer for Indigenous Australians. Copyright © 2017 Morris et al.Item Measuring health care experiences that matter to Indigenous people in Australia with cancer: identifying critical gaps in existing tools.(2021-04-22) Green M.; Cunningham J.; Anderson K.; Griffiths K.; Garvey G.Background: Measurement of patients' healthcare experiences is increasingly used as an indicator of quality of care, but there are concerns that existing measures omit information that is meaningful to patients and that results may not be used systematically to inform service improvement. Further, current approaches may be inadequate for some population groups, such as Indigenous people in Australia, whose healthcare experience is impacted by the context of colonisation and discordance between Indigenous understandings of health and the Western biomedical health system. This study aimed to assess the extent to which existing patient experience measures used in Australia collect information about critical aspects of cancer care, as previously identified by Indigenous people affected by cancer and their health care providers. Method(s): A two-stage process was used to examine the adequacy of existing patient experience measures for Indigenous people in Australia: (1) relevant tools and measures were identified and assessed, and four measures selected as suitable comparators; (2) comparators were examined in detail and mapped against topics identified in earlier research as important to Indigenous people with cancer. Gaps in topic coverage in comparators were identified. Result(s): No comparators completely captured the critical aspects of cancer care identified by Indigenous people affected by cancer and their health care providers. The number of topics 'partially' captured by the four comparators ranged from 4 to 7 out of 9. While most topics were partially covered, the lack of questions around culture and cultural safety was notable. Conclusion(s): Existing tools are likely to miss key aspects of Indigenous peoples' experiences of cancer care in Australia. Failure to adequately assess care experiences related to cultural safety may compromise efforts to improve health outcomes. Addressing gaps requires development of experience measures that are strengths-based, reflect an Indigenous worldview and measure aspects of experience relevant to Indigenous people.Copyright © 2021, The Author(s).Item Traditional and complementary medicine use among Indigenous cancer patients in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States: a systematic review.(2018-08-23) Gall A.; Leske S.; Adams J.; Matthews V.; Anderson K.; Lawler S.; Garvey G.Background: Cancer 'patients' are increasingly using traditional Indigenous and complementary medicines (T&CM) alongside conventional medical treatments to both cure and cope with their cancer diagnoses. To date T&CM use among Indigenous cancer patients from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States has not been systematically reviewed. Method(s): We systematically searched bibliographic databases to identify original research published between January 2000 and October 2017 regarding T&CM use by Indigenous cancer patients in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Data from records meeting eligibility criteria were extracted and appraised for quality by 2 independent reviewers. Result(s): Twenty-one journal articles from 18 studies across all 4 countries met our inclusion criteria. T&CM use ranged from 19% to 57.7% (differing across countries). T&CM was mostly used concurrently with conventional cancer treatments to meet their spiritual, emotional, social, and cultural needs; however, bush, traditional, and herbal medicines were used in a minority of cases as an alternative. Conclusion(s): Our findings highlight the importance of T&CM use to Indigenous cancer patients across these 4 countries; we identified multiple perceived spiritual, emotional and cultural benefits to its use. The patient's perception of their health professional's attitudes toward T&CM in some cases hindered or encouraged the patient's disclosure. Additional research is required to further explore the use and disclosure of T&CM among Indigenous cancer patients to help inform and ensure effective, safe, coordinated care for Indigenous cancer patients that relies on shared open decision making and communication across patients, communities, and providers.Copyright © The Author(s) 2018.