Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Identifying young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in linked administrative data: A comparison of methods

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

McNamara, B J
Jones, Jocelyn
Shepherd, Carrington
Gubhaju, Lina
Joshy, Grace
McAullay, Daniel
Preen, David B
Jorm, Louisa
Eades, Sandra

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Swansea University, UK

Abstract

Objective To quantify differences between three validated algorithms in ascertaining Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in linked administrative data. Methods Linked administrative health data for children born in WA from 2000-2013, were used to examine the cohorts identified by three methods: A) the Indigenous Status Flag (ISF, derived by the WA Data Linkage Branch using a multistage-median approach) for the children alone; B) the ISF of the children, their parents and grandparents; and C) Indigenous status of the child, mother or father on either of the child's perinatal records (Midwives or birth registration), to determine differing characteristics of each cohort. Results Method B established a larger cohort (33,697) than Method C (33,510) and Method A (27,482), with all methods identifying a core group of 26,993 children (80-98%). Compared with children identified by Method A, additional children identified by Methods B or C, were from less-disadvantaged and more urban areas, and had better perinatal outcomes (e.g. lower proportions of small-for-gestational age, 10% vs 16%). Differences in demographics and health outcomes between Methods C and B were minimal. Conclusions Demographic and perinatal health characteristics differ by Indigenous identification method. Using perinatal records or the ISF of parents and grandparents (in addition to the ISF of the child) appear to be more inclusive methods for identifying young Indigenous children in administrative datasets.

Description

Citation

Source

International Journal of Population Data Science

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

Open Access

License Rights

CC BY 4.0

Restricted until