Enhancement of scoping review methodology to reflect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Tina Brodie , Natasha J. Howard , Odette Pearson , Kootsy Canuto , Alex Brown , The Advisory Group
{"title":"Enhancement of scoping review methodology to reflect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing","authors":"Tina Brodie ,&nbsp;Natasha J. Howard ,&nbsp;Odette Pearson ,&nbsp;Kootsy Canuto ,&nbsp;Alex Brown ,&nbsp;The Advisory Group","doi":"10.1016/j.anzjph.2023.100096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This paper argues for the enhancement of scoping review methods to incorporate Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing for more effective understandings of evidence of importance to Indigenous populations.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Scoping review methodology typically aims to understand existing evidence and support translation of evidence into practice. Levac and colleagues (2010) scoping review methodology stages: 1) Identify the research question; 2) Identify relevant studies; 3) Study selection; 4) Charting the data; 5) Collating, summarising, and reporting results; and 6) Consultation were considered from the perspective of Indigenous knowledges and adapted accordingly.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>An enhanced method better aligns with Indigenous methodologies which are based on relationality, collaboration, partnership, reciprocity, and benefit. Consultation was redefined in this enhancement as <em>partnership</em> and integrated throughout scoping review stages, which are underpinned by key methodological principles.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Enhancement of scoping review stages with Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing has the potential to strengthen the utility of scoping review methods to better meet the needs of and ensure relevance for Indigenous populations.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for public health</h3><p>These enhancements can increase the potential for knowledge translation and implementation of culturally relevant evidence-based approaches into practice for Indigenous populations and for other populations who experience health inequities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8620,"journal":{"name":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1326020023052731/pdfft?md5=6f9af17c9ecd65c2b354309e54c6be5a&pid=1-s2.0-S1326020023052731-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1326020023052731","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This paper argues for the enhancement of scoping review methods to incorporate Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing for more effective understandings of evidence of importance to Indigenous populations.

Methods

Scoping review methodology typically aims to understand existing evidence and support translation of evidence into practice. Levac and colleagues (2010) scoping review methodology stages: 1) Identify the research question; 2) Identify relevant studies; 3) Study selection; 4) Charting the data; 5) Collating, summarising, and reporting results; and 6) Consultation were considered from the perspective of Indigenous knowledges and adapted accordingly.

Results

An enhanced method better aligns with Indigenous methodologies which are based on relationality, collaboration, partnership, reciprocity, and benefit. Consultation was redefined in this enhancement as partnership and integrated throughout scoping review stages, which are underpinned by key methodological principles.

Conclusions

Enhancement of scoping review stages with Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing has the potential to strengthen the utility of scoping review methods to better meet the needs of and ensure relevance for Indigenous populations.

Implications for public health

These enhancements can increase the potential for knowledge translation and implementation of culturally relevant evidence-based approaches into practice for Indigenous populations and for other populations who experience health inequities.

加强范围审查方法,以反映土著和托雷斯海峡岛民的认识、存在和行为方式
本文主张加强范围审查方法,以纳入土著居民的认识、存在和行为方式,以更有效地理解对土著人口重要的证据。方法范围审查方法通常旨在理解现有证据并支持将证据转化为实践。Levac和同事(2010)范围审查方法论阶段:1)确定研究问题;2)识别相关研究;3)研究选择;4)绘制数据图;5)整理、总结和报告结果;6)从土著知识的角度考虑协商,并作出相应调整。结果改进后的方法更符合基于关系、协作、伙伴关系、互惠和利益的本土方法。在这次加强中,协商被重新定义为伙伴关系,并纳入以关键方法原则为基础的整个范围审查阶段。结论以土著居民的认识、存在和行为方式加强范围审查阶段,有可能加强范围审查方法的实用性,以更好地满足土著居民的需求并确保其相关性。对公共卫生的影响这些改进可以增加知识转化的潜力,并为土著居民和其他经历卫生不平等的人群实施与文化相关的循证方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
121
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health (ANZJPH) is concerned with public health issues. The research reported includes formal epidemiological inquiries into the correlates and causes of diseases and health-related behaviour, analyses of public policy affecting health and disease, and detailed studies of the cultures and social structures within which health and illness exist. The Journal is multidisciplinary and aims to publish methodologically sound research from any of the academic disciplines that constitute public health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信