Browsing by Author "Gall A."
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
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 The development of an Indigenous cancer network - lessons learned.(2015-11-17) Morris B.; Reed B.; Gall A.; Arley B.; Cunningham J.; Garvey G.Cancer is the second leading cause of death among Indigenous Australians, and while non-Indigenous Australians have experienced improved outcomes in cancer diagnosis, treatment and survival, this is not mirrored among Indigenous Australians. A growing body of evidence indicates widespread failure of the health system to adequately prevent, diagnose and treat cancer among Indigenous Australians, and there is an increasing sense of urgency to escalate the effort to address these disparities. In response to this, the National Indigenous Cancer Network (NICaN) was launched in 2013. This presentation will discuss challenges and successes of developing NICaN, aimed at encouraging and supporting collaboration in Indigenous cancer research and the delivery of services to Indigenous people with cancer. NICaN is a partnership between Menzies School of Health Research, the Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet (a national research institute specialising in translational research with a population health focus), the Lowitja Institute (Australia's national institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research), Cancer Council Australia (Australia's peak national non-government cancer control organisation). NICaN aims to ensure that what's known about cancer in Indigenous Australians is available for use by people with cancer, their families, practitioners, policy makers and researchers. Since its conception NICaN has grown in scope and membership and is a critical part of translating Indigenous cancer research into practice. There have been a number of lessons learned, challenges and successes, including: developing and maintaining collaborative partnerships with key players; role of cancer survivors as advocates and ambassadors; ensuring consumer buyin, input and ongoing engagement; and the use of social media strategies. NICaN has established itself as a credible, Indigenous-led, and independent (i.e., non-government, non-bureaucratic) organisation aimed at increasing access to information about cancer for Indigenous people, and facilitating community engagement and research translation to assist in improving cancer outcomes for Indigenous Australians.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.