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.

A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes

dc.contributor.authorSnijder, Mieke
dc.contributor.authorShakeshaft, Anthony
dc.contributor.authorWagemakers, Annemarie
dc.contributor.authorStephens, Anne
dc.contributor.authorCalabria, Bianca
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-22T22:51:05Z
dc.date.available2015-11-22T22:51:05Z
dc.date.issued2015-11-21
dc.date.updated2016-02-24T10:11:56Z
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Community development is a health promotion approach identified as having great potential to improve Indigenous health, because of its potential for extensive community participation. There has been no systematic examination of the extent of community participation in community development projects and little analysis of their effectiveness. This systematic review aims to identify the extent of community participation in community development projects implemented in Australian Indigenous communities, critically appraise the qualitative and quantitative methods used in their evaluation, and summarise their outcomes. METHODS: Ten electronic peer-reviewed databases and two electronic grey literature databases were searched for relevant studies published between 1990 and 2015. The level of community participation and the methodological quality of the qualitative and quantitative components of the studies were assessed against standardised criteria. RESULTS: Thirty one evaluation studies of community development projects were identified. Community participation varied between different phases of project development, generally high during project implementation, but low during the evaluation phase. For the majority of studies, methodological quality was low and the methods were poorly described. Although positive qualitative or quantitative outcomes were reported in all studies, only two studies reported statistically significant outcomes. DISCUSSION: Partnerships between researchers, community members and service providers have great potential to improve methodological quality and community participation when research skills and community knowledge are integrated to design, implement and evaluate community development projects. CONCLUSION: The methodological quality of studies evaluating Australian Indigenous community development projects is currently too weak to confidently determine the cost-effectiveness of community development projects in improving the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Australians. Higher quality studies evaluating community development projects would strengthen the evidence base.
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors gratefully acknowledge the NDARC Education Trustees for funding the PhD candidature of MS. We thank New South Wales Health for funding the Maldahnalanga project, of which this review is a part. We also gratefully acknowledge the Post-Doctoral Research funding from the Northern Research Futures Collaborative Research Network of ASt. We also gratefully acknowledge the input from the Aboriginal community-based partners who are part of the Maldahnalanga project.en_AU
dc.identifier.citationBMC Public Health. 2015 Nov 21;15(1):1154
dc.identifier.issn1471-2458en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2514-7
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/16585
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.publisherBioMed Central
dc.rights© 2015 Snijder et al. Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
dc.rights.holderSnijder et al.
dc.sourceBMC Public Health
dc.subjectCommunity development
dc.subjectIndigenous
dc.subjectAboriginal
dc.subjectTorres Strait Islander
dc.subjectHealth promotion
dc.subjectCommunity participation
dc.subjectEmpowerment
dc.subjectMethodological quality
dc.subjectQualitative
dc.subjectQuantitative
dc.titleA systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
dc.typeJournal article
local.bibliographicCitation.issue1en_AU
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage16
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage1154en_AU
local.contributor.affiliationCalabria, B., National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Research School of Population Health, College of Medicine, Biology and Environment, The Australian National Universityen_AU
local.contributor.authoruidu3363025en_AU
local.identifier.absfor111701 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health
local.identifier.ariespublicationU3488905xPUB6813
local.identifier.citationvolume15en_AU
local.identifier.doi10.1186/s12889-015-2514-7en_AU
local.identifier.essn1471-2458en_AU
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-84947750983
local.publisher.urlhttp://www.biomedcentral.com/en_AU
local.type.statusPublished Versionen_AU

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Snijder et al A Systematic Review of Studies Evaluating 2015.pdf
Size:
1.17 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
884 B
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: