The conduct of Australian Indigenous primary health care research focusing on social and emotional wellbeing: a systematic review.

Objectives and importance of study: Values and ethics: guidelines for ethical conduct in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research (Values and ethics) describes key values that should underpin Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous)-focused health research. It is unclear how research teams address this document in primary health care research. We systematically review the primary health care literature focusing on Indigenous social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB) to identify how Values and ethics and community preferences for standards of behaviour (local protocols) are addressed during research. STUDY TYPE: Systematic review in accordance with PRISMA Guidelines and MOOSE Guidelines for Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies. METHODS: We searched four databases and one Indigenous-specific website for qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method studies published since Values and ethics was implemented (2003). Included studies were conducted in primary health care services, focused on Indigenous SEWB and were conducted by research teams. Using standard data extraction forms, we identified actions taken (reported by authors or identified by us) relating to Values and ethics and local protocols. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies were included. Authors of two studies explicitly mentioned the Values and ethics document, but neither reported how their actions related to the document's values. In more than half the studies, we identified at least three actions relating to the values. Some actions related to multiple values, including use of culturally sensitive research processes and involving Indigenous representatives in the research team. Local protocols were rarely reported. CONCLUSION: Addressing Values and ethics appears to improve research projects. The academic community should focus on culturally sensitive research processes, relationship building and developing the Indigenous research workforce, to facilitate acceptable research that affects health outcomes. For Values and ethics to achieve its full impact and to improve learning between research teams, authors should be encouraged to report how the principles are addressed during research, including barriers and enablers that are encountered.

The quality of Australian Indigenous primary health care research focusing on social and emotional wellbeing: a systematic review.

Objectives and importance of the study: Primary health care research focused on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) people is needed to ensure that key frontline services provide evidence based and culturally appropriate care. We systematically reviewed the published primary health care literature to identify research designs, processes and outcomes, and assess the scientific quality of research focused on social and emotional wellbeing. This will inform future research to improve evidence based, culturally appropriate primary health care. STUDY TYPE: Systematic review in accordance with PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. METHODS: Four databases and one Indigenous-specific project website were searched for qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method published research. Studies that were conducted in primary health care services and focused on the social and emotional wellbeing of Indigenous people were included. Scientific quality was assessed using risk-of-bias assessment tools that were modified to meet our aims. We assessed community acceptance by identifying the involvement of community governance structures and representation during research development, conduct and reporting. Data were extracted using standard forms developed for this review. RESULTS: We included 32 articles, which reported on 25 studies. Qualitative and mixed methods were used in 18 studies. Twelve articles were judged as high or unclear risk of bias, four as moderate and five as low risk of bias. Another four studies were not able to be assessed as they did not align with the risk-of-bias tools. Of the five articles judged as low risk of bias, two also had high community acceptance and both of these were qualitative. One used a phenomenological approach and the other combined participatory action research with a social-ecological perspective and incorporated 'two-way learning' principles. Of the 16 studies where a primary outcome was identified, eight aimed to identify perceptions or experiences. The remaining studies assessed resources, or evaluated services, interventions, programs or policies. We were unable to identify primary outcomes in eight studies. CONCLUSION: Conducting Indigenous-focused primary health care research that is scientifically robust, culturally appropriate and produces community-level outcomes is challenging. We suggest that research teams use participatory, culturally sensitive approaches and collaborate closely to plan and implement high-quality research that incorporates local perspectives. Research should result in beneficial outcomes for the communities involved.