5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Identifying Environmental Determinants Relevant to Health and Wellbeing in Remote Australian Indigenous Communities: A Scoping Review of Grey Literature

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The high prevalence of preventable infectious and chronic diseases in Australian Indigenous populations is a major public health concern. Existing research has rarely examined the role of built and socio-political environmental factors relating to remote Indigenous health and wellbeing. This research identified built and socio-political environmental indicators from publicly available grey literature documents locally-relevant to remote Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory (NT), Australia. Existing planning documents with evidence of community input were used to reduce the response burden on Indigenous communities. A scoping review of community-focused planning documents resulted in the identification of 1120 built and 2215 socio-political environmental indicators. Indicators were systematically classified using an Indigenous indicator classification system (IICS). Applying the IICS yielded indicators prominently featuring the “community infrastructure” domain within the built environment, and the “community capacity” domain within the socio-political environment. This research demonstrates the utility of utilizing existing planning documents and a culturally appropriate systematic classification system to consolidate environmental determinants that influence health and disease occurrence. The findings also support understanding of which features of community-level built and socio-political environments amenable to public health and social policy actions might be targeted to help reduce the prevalence of infectious and chronic diseases in Indigenous communities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references61

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews.

            Reviews of primary research are becoming more common as evidence-based practice gains recognition as the benchmark for care, and the number of, and access to, primary research sources has grown. One of the newer review types is the 'scoping review'. In general, scoping reviews are commonly used for 'reconnaissance' - to clarify working definitions and conceptual boundaries of a topic or field. Scoping reviews are therefore particularly useful when a body of literature has not yet been comprehensively reviewed, or exhibits a complex or heterogeneous nature not amenable to a more precise systematic review of the evidence. While scoping reviews may be conducted to determine the value and probable scope of a full systematic review, they may also be undertaken as exercises in and of themselves to summarize and disseminate research findings, to identify research gaps, and to make recommendations for the future research. This article briefly introduces the reader to scoping reviews, how they are different to systematic reviews, and why they might be conducted. The methodology and guidance for the conduct of systematic scoping reviews outlined below was developed by members of the Joanna Briggs Institute and members of five Joanna Briggs Collaborating Centres.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Neighborhoods and health.

              Features of neighborhoods or residential environments may affect health and contribute to social and race/ethnic inequalities in health. The study of neighborhood health effects has grown exponentially over the past 15 years. This chapter summarizes key work in this area with a particular focus on chronic disease outcomes (specifically obesity and related risk factors) and mental health (specifically depression and depressive symptoms). Empirical work is classified into two main eras: studies that use census proxies and studies that directly measure neighborhood attributes using a variety of approaches. Key conceptual and methodological challenges in studying neighborhood health effects are reviewed. Existing gaps in knowledge and promising new directions in the field are highlighted.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                15 April 2021
                April 2021
                : 18
                : 8
                : 4167
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia; mark.daniel@ 123456canberra.edu.au (M.D.); natasha.howard@ 123456sahmri.com (N.J.H.); alex.brown@ 123456sahmri.com (A.B.); margaret.cargo@ 123456canberra.edu.au (M.C.)
                [2 ]Research Centre for Palliative Care, Death and Dying, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA 5042, Australia
                [3 ]Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT 2601, Australia
                [4 ]South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
                [5 ]Wardliparingga Aboriginal Health Equity, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
                [6 ]Adelaide Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
                [7 ]Australian Centre for Child Protection, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia; marawuy@ 123456bigpond.com
                [8 ]Environmental Health Branch, Department of Health, Northern Territory Government, Casuarina, NT 0810, Australia; nicola.slavin@ 123456nt.gov.au
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: amal.chakraborty@ 123456mymail.unisa.edu.au ; Tel.: +61-(0)-422-473-881
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1837-1224
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9112-134X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8099-3107
                Article
                ijerph-18-04167
                10.3390/ijerph18084167
                8071139
                33920765
                a0fbd7f0-465f-4092-84cb-69ac16330f14
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 17 March 2021
                : 13 April 2021
                Categories
                Review

                Public health
                indigenous,public health,environmental health,built environment,social planning,public policy,community infrastructure,community capacity,environmental indicators,grey literature

                Comments

                Comment on this article