An empowerment intervention for Indigenous communities: An outcome assessment

© 2015 Kinchin et al. Background: Empowerment programs have been shown to contribute to increased empowerment of individuals and build capacity within the community or workplace. To-date, the impact of empowerment programs has yet to be quantified in the published literature in this field. This study assessed the Indigenous-developed Family Wellbeing (FWB) program as an empowerment intervention for a child safety workforce in remote Indigenous communities by measuring effect sizes. The study also assessed the value of measurement tools for future impact evaluations. Methods: A three-day FWB workshop designed to promote empowerment and workplace engagement among child protection staffwas held across five remote north Queensland Indigenous communities. The FWB assessment tool comprised a set of validated surveys including the Growth and Empowerment Measure (GEM), Australian Unity Wellbeing Index, Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) and Workforce engagement survey. The assessment was conducted pre-intervention and three months post-intervention. Results: The analysis of pre-and post-surveys revealed that the GEM appeared to be the most tangible measure for detecting positive changes in communication, conflict resolution, decision making and life skill development. The GEM indicated a 17 % positive change compared to 9 % for the Australian Unity Wellbeing Index, 5 % for the workforce engagement survey and less than 1 % for K10. Conclusions: This study extended qualitative research and identified the best measurement tool for detecting the outcomes of empowerment programs. The GEM was found the most sensitive and the most tangible measure that captures improvements in communication, conflict resolution, decision making and life skill development. The GEM and Australian Unity Wellbeing Index could be recommended as routine measures for empowerment programs assessment among similar remote area workforce

The effectiveness of implementation in Indigenous Australian healthcare: An overview of literature reviews

© 2016 McCalman et al. Background: Effective implementation can maximise the beneficial impacts of health services. It is therefore important to review implementation in the context of Indigenous populations, who suffer some of the greatest disadvantage within developed countries. This paper analyses Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter Indigenous) Australian health implementation reviews to examine the research question: What is the effectiveness of implementation, as reported in the Indigenous Australian health implementation literature? Methods: Eight databases were systematically searched to find reviews of Indigenous Australian health services and/or programs where implementation was the focus. Search terms included Aborigin∗OR Indigen∗OR Torres AND health AND service OR program∗OR intervention AND implementation (or like terms) AND Australia AND review. Review findings were analysed through the lens of the PARiHS framework which theorises that successful implementation occurs through the interplay of evidence, context and facilitation. The review followed Cochrane methods but was not registered. Results: Six reviews were found; these encompassed 107 studies that considered health service/program implementation. Included studies described many health services implemented across Australia as not underpinned by rigorous impact evaluation; nevertheless implementers tended to prefer evidence-based interventions. Effective implementation was supported by clearly defined management systems, employment of Indigenous health workers as leaders, community control, partnerships, tailoring for diverse places and settings; and active facilitation methods. Short-term funding meant most studies focused on implementation in one site through pilot initiatives. Only two mentioned cost effectiveness. Indigenous Australian studies incorporated two elements not included in the PARiHS reference guide: the value of community control and equity of service provision across sites. Conclusions: Comparison of the Indigenous Australian review findings against the PARiHS reference guide elements suggested a fledgling but growing state of Indigenous implementation research, and considerable scope to improve the effectiveness of implementation. Further research is required to explore Indigenous people's understandings of what is important in healthcare implementation; particularly in relation to the value of community control and equity issues

Evaluating the Implementation of a Mental Health Referral Service "Connect to Wellbeing": A Quality Improvement Approach.

There is increasing demand for mental health services to be accessible to diverse populations in flexible, yet, cost-effective ways. This article presents the findings from a study that evaluated the process of implementing Connect to Wellbeing (CTW), a new mental health intake, assessment and referral service in regional Australia, to determine how well it improved access to services, and to identify potential measures that could be used to evaluate value for money. The study used a hybrid study design to conduct a process evaluation to better understand: the process of implementing CTW; and the barriers and factors enabling implementation of CTW. In addition, to better understand how to measure the cost-effectiveness of such services, the hybrid study design included an assessment of potential outcome measures suitable for ascertaining both the effectiveness of CTW in client health outcomes, and conducting a value for money analysis. The process evaluation found evidence that by improving processes, and removing waitlists CTW had created an opportunity to broadened the scope and type of psychological services offered which improved accessibility. The assessment of potential outcome measures provided insight into suitable measures for future evaluation into service effectiveness, client health outcomes and value for money

Evaluating research impact: The development of a research for impact tool

© 2016 Tsey, Lawson, Kinchin, Bainbridge, McCalman, Watkin, Cadet-James and Rossetto. Introduction: This paper examines the process of developing a Research for Impact Tool in the contexts of general fiscal constraint, increased competition for funding, perennial concerns about the over-researching of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues without demonstrable benefits as well as conceptual and methodological difficulties of evaluating research impact. The aim is to highlight the challenges and opportunities involved in evaluating research impact to serve as resource for potential users of the research for impact tool and others interested in assessing the impact of research. Materials and methods: A combination of literature reviews, workshops with researchers, and reflections by project team members and partners using participatory snowball techniques. Results: Assessing research impact is perceived to be difficult, akin to the so-called "wicked problem," but not impossible. Heuristic and collaborative approach to research that takes the expectations of research users, research participants and the funders of research offers a pragmatic solution to evaluating research impact. The logic of the proposed Research for Impact Tool is based on the understanding that the value of research is to create evidence and/or products to support smarter decisions so as to improve the human condition. Research is, therefore, of limited value unless the evidence created is used to make smarter decisions for the betterment of society. A practical way of approaching research impact is, therefore, to start with the decisions confronting decision makers whether they are government policymakers, industry, professional practitioners, or households and the extent to which the research supports them to make smarter policy and practice decisions and the knock-on consequences of doing so. Embedded at each step in the impact planning and tracking process is the need for appropriate mix of expertise, capacity enhancement, and collaborative participatory learning-by-doing approaches. Discussion: The tool was developed in the context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research but the basic idea that the way to assess research impact is to start upfront with the information needs of decisions makers is equally applicable to research in other settings, both applied (horizontal) and basic (vertical) research. The tool will be further tested and evaluated with researchers over the next 2 years (2016/17). The decision by the Australian Government to include 'industry engagement' and 'impact' as additions to the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) quality measures from 2018 makes the Research for Impact Tool a timely development. The wider challenge is to engage with major Australian research funding agencies to ensure consistent alignment and approaches across research users, communities, and funders in evaluating impact

No one's discussing the elephant in the room: Contemplating questions of research impact and benefit in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian health research

© 2015 Bainbridge et al. Background: There remains a concern that Indigenous Australians have been over-researched without corresponding improvements in their health; this trend is applicable to most Indigenous populations globally. This debate article has a dual purpose: 1) to open a frank conversation about the value of research to Indigenous Australian populations; and 2) to stimulate ways of thinking about potential resolutions to the lack of progress made in the Indigenous research benefit debate. Discussion: Capturing the meaning of research benefit takes the form of ethical value-oriented methodological considerations in the decision-making processes of Indigenous research endeavours. Because research practices come from Western knowledge bases, attaining such positions in research means reconciling both Indigenous and Western knowledge systems to produce new methodologies that guide planning, evaluating and monitoring of research practices as necessary. Increasingly, more sophisticated performance measures have been implemented to ensure academic impact and benefits are captured. Assessing societal and other non-academic impacts and benefits however, has not been accorded corresponding attention. Research reform has only focussed on research translation in more recent years. The research impact debate must take account of the various standards of accountability (to whom), impact priorities (for whom), positive and negative impacts, and biases that operate in describing impact and measuring benefit. Summary: A perennial question in Indigenous research discourse is whether the abundance of research conducted; purportedly to improve health, is justified and benefits Indigenous people in ways that are meaningful and valued by them. Different research stakeholders have different conceptions of the value and nature of research, its conduct, what it should achieve and the kinds of benefits expected. We need to work collaboratively and listen more closely to the voice of Indigenous Australians to better understand, demonstrate and measure health research benefits. The authors conclude that as an imperative, a systematic benefit assessment strategy that includes identification of research priorities and planning, monitoring and evaluation components needs to be developed and implemented across research projects. In Indigenous health research, this will often mean adopting a benefit-led approach by changing the way research is done and preferencing alternative research methodologies. As a point of departure to improving impact and reaching mutually beneficial outcomes for researchers and partners in Indigenous health research, we need to routinise the assessment of benefit from outset of research as one of the standards toward which we work

Effect of diet and dietary fatty acids on the transformation and incorporation of C18 fatty acids in double-muscled Belgian Blue young bulls

Three groups of double-muscled Belgian Blue young bulls were fed during different stages of production diets differing in the proportions of linolenic and linoleic acid by including linseed in the concentrate or giving grass silage as main linolenic acid suppliers. Samples of rumen and abomasal contents and of the longissimus thoracis, subcutaneous fat, and liver were taken to analyze the fatty acid pattern with emphasis on the individual trans (t) C18:1 fatty acids and cis-9,trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid (c9t11CLA). Trans C18:1 isomers represented up to 20 g/100 g of total fatty acids in rumen and abomasal contents, whereas the accumulation of c9t11CLA was limited. Total trans C18:1 content in subcutaneous fat and intramuscular fat of the longissimus thoracis comprised 8.4 and 5.2 g/100 g of total fatty acids, respectively, with t11C18:1 being the most abundant one. Compared to rumen contents, subcutaneous and intramuscular fat were enriched in c9t11CLA and contained fewer tC18:1 isomers, resulting in a higher c9t11CLA/t11C18:1 ratio (0.04, 0.22, and 0.22, respectively). This result suggests that the endogenous synthesis of c9t11CLA in adipose tissue by the Delta(9)-desaturase was more important than its ruminal production