Evidence mapPaperPMID 36498237Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

A Comprehensive Review of Optimal Approaches to Co-Design in Health with First Nations Australians.

Tamara Butler, Alana Gall, Gail Garvey, Khwanruethai Ngampromwongse, Debra Hector, Scott Turnbull, Kerri Lucas, Caroline Nehill, Anna Boltong, Dorothy Keefe and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Lung Cancer Screening Participation Among Indigenous Peoples Worldwide: A Systematic Review of Challenges and Opportunities.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. True Co-Design: Buzzword or Breakthrough? The Value of Authentic Relationships in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Promotion.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. BMJ open · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A Scoping Review of Health-Related Citizen Science Projects Involving Indigenous Peoples in Australia and Internationally.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Tamara ButlerSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston 4006, Australia.
Alana GallSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston 4006, Australia.
Gail GarveySchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston 4006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5065-5716
Khwanruethai NgampromwongseSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston 4006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0915-3770
Debra HectorCancer Australia, Sydney 2010, Australia.
Scott TurnbullCancer Australia, Sydney 2010, Australia.
Kerri LucasCancer Australia, Sydney 2010, Australia.
Caroline NehillCancer Australia, Sydney 2010, Australia.
Anna BoltongCancer Australia, Sydney 2010, Australia.
Dorothy KeefeCancer Australia, Sydney 2010, Australia.
Kate AndersonSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston 4006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1214-2001

Funding

Cancer Australia F21/412
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAustralia's social, structural, and political context, together with the continuing impact of colonisation, perpetuates health care and outcome disparities for First Nations Australians. A new approach led by First Nations Australians is required to address these disparities. Co-design is emerging as a valued method for First Nations Australian communities to drive change in health policy and practice to better meet their needs and priorities. However, it is critical that co-design processes and outcomes are culturally safe and effective.

methodsFirst Nations Australian co-led team conducted a comprehensive review to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature reporting the application of co-design in health-related areas by and with First Nations Australians. A First Nations Co-Design Working Group (FNCDWG) was established to guide this work and team.A Collaborative Yarning Methodology (CYM) was used to conduct a thematic analysis of the included literature.

resultsAfter full-text screening, 99 studies were included. Thematic analysis elicited the following six key themes, which included 28 practical sub-themes, relevant to co-design in health with First Nations Australians:

conclusionThe findings of this review provide a valuable snapshot of the existing evidence to be used as a starting point to guide appropriate and effective applications of co-design in health with First Nations Australians.

Indexed as

Health Services, IndigenousAmerican Indian or Alaska NativeAustraliaAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PeoplesDelivery of Health CareHumansPopulation GroupsAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoplecancerco-designcommunity engagementcomprehensive reviewFirst Nations peoplesparticipatory action research

Identifiers

PMID36498237
PMCPMC9735487

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.