Cargando…

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

BACKGROUND: 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 developme...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Snijder, Mieke, Shakeshaft, Anthony, Wagemakers, Annemarie, Stephens, Anne, Calabria, Bianca
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4655078/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26590869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2514-7
_version_ 1782402145896628224
author Snijder, Mieke
Shakeshaft, Anthony
Wagemakers, Annemarie
Stephens, Anne
Calabria, Bianca
author_facet Snijder, Mieke
Shakeshaft, Anthony
Wagemakers, Annemarie
Stephens, Anne
Calabria, Bianca
author_sort Snijder, Mieke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4655078
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46550782015-11-23 A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes Snijder, Mieke Shakeshaft, Anthony Wagemakers, Annemarie Stephens, Anne Calabria, Bianca BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: 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. BioMed Central 2015-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4655078/ /pubmed/26590869 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2514-7 Text en © Snijder et al. 2015 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.
spellingShingle Research Article
Snijder, Mieke
Shakeshaft, Anthony
Wagemakers, Annemarie
Stephens, Anne
Calabria, Bianca
A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
title A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
title_full A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
title_fullStr A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
title_short A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
title_sort systematic review of studies evaluating australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4655078/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26590869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2514-7
work_keys_str_mv AT snijdermieke asystematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT shakeshaftanthony asystematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT wagemakersannemarie asystematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT stephensanne asystematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT calabriabianca asystematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT snijdermieke systematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT shakeshaftanthony systematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT wagemakersannemarie systematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT stephensanne systematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes
AT calabriabianca systematicreviewofstudiesevaluatingaustralianindigenouscommunitydevelopmentprojectstheextentofcommunityparticipationtheirmethodologicalqualityandtheiroutcomes