Search

Background: Ear and hearing care programs are critical to early detection and management of otitis media (or middle ear disease). Otitis media and associated hearing loss disproportionately impacts First Nations children. This affects speech and language development, social and cognitive development and, in turn, education and life outcomes. This scoping review aimed to better understand how ear and hearing care programs for First Nations children in high-income colonial-settler countries aimed to reduce the burden of otitis media and increase equitable access to care. Specifically, the review aimed to chart program strategies, map the focus of each program against 4 parts of a care pathway (prevention, detection, diagnosis/management, rehabilitation), and to identify the factors that indicated the longer-term sustainability and success of programs., Method: A database search was conducted in March 2021 using Medline, Embase, Global Health, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and Academic Search Premier. Programs were eligible or inclusion if they had either been developed or run at any time between January 2010 to March 2021. Search terms encompassed terms such as First Nations children, ear and hearing care, and health programs, initiatives, campaigns, and services., Results: Twenty-seven articles met the criteria to be included in the review and described a total of twenty-one ear and hearing care programs. Programs employed strategies to: (i) connect patients to specialist services, (ii) improve cultural safety of services, and (iii) increase access to ear and hearing care services. However, program evaluation measures were limited to outputs or the evaluation of service-level outcome, rather than patient-based outcomes. Factors which contributed to program sustainability included funding and community involvement although these were limited in many cases., Conclusion: The result of this study highlighted that programs primarily operate at two points along the care pathway-detection and diagnosis/management, presumably where the greatest need lies. Targeted strategies were used to address these, some which were limited in their approach. The success of many programs are evaluated as outputs, and many programs rely on funding sources which can potentially limit longer-term sustainability. Finally, the involvement of First Nations people and communities typically only occurred during implementation rather than across the development of the program. Future programs should be embedded within a connected system of care and tied to existing policies and funding streams to ensure long term viability. Programs should be governed and evaluated by First Nations communities to further ensure programs are sustainable and are designed to meet community needs., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background and Objective: There is currently no standardised way to share information across disciplines about initiatives, including fields such as health, environment, basic science, manufacturing, media and international development. All problems, including complex global problems such as air pollution and pandemics require reliable data sharing between disciplines in order to respond effectively. Current reporting methods also lack information about the ways in which different people and organisations are involved in initiatives, making it difficult to collate and appraise data about the most effective ways to involve different people. The objective of STARDIT (Standardised Data on Initiatives) is to address current limitations and inconsistencies in sharing data about initiatives. The STARDIT system features standardised data reporting about initiatives, including who has been involved, what tasks they did, and any impacts observed. STARDIT was created to help everyone in the world find and understand information about collective human actions, which are referred to as 'initiatives'. STARDIT enables multiple categories of data to be reported in a standardised way across disciplines, facilitating appraisal of initiatives and aiding synthesis of evidence for the most effective ways for people to be involved in initiatives. This article outlines progress to date on STARDIT; current usage; information about submitting reports; planned next steps and how anyone can become involved., Method: STARDIT development is guided by participatory action research paradigms, and has been co-created with people from multiple disciplines and countries. Co-authors include cancer patients, people affected by rare diseases, health researchers, environmental researchers, economists, librarians and academic publishers. The co-authors also worked with Indigenous peoples from multiple countries and in partnership with an organisation working with Indigenous Australians., Results and Discussion: Over 100 people from multiple disciplines and countries have been involved in co-designing STARDIT since 2019. STARDIT is the first open access web-based data-sharing system which standardises the way that information about initiatives is reported across diverse fields and disciplines, including information about which tasks were done by which stakeholders. STARDIT is designed to work with existing data standards. STARDIT data will be released into the public domain (CC0) and integrated into Wikidata; it works across multiple languages and is both human and machine readable. Reports can be updated throughout the lifetime of an initiative, from planning to evaluation, allowing anyone to be involved in reporting impacts and outcomes. STARDIT is the first system that enables sharing of standardised data about initiatives across disciplines. A working Beta version was publicly released in February 2021 (ScienceforAll.World/STARDIT). Subsequently, STARDIT reports have been created for peer-reviewed research in multiple journals and multiple research projects, demonstrating the usability. In addition, organisations including Cochrane and Australian Genomics have created prospective reports outlining planned initiatives., Conclusions: STARDIT can help create high-quality standardised information on initiatives trying to solve complex multidisciplinary global problems., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: This study aimed to characterise the factors relating to participation in a postal follow-up study in Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal individuals, given the need to quantify potential biases from loss to follow-up and the lack of evidence regarding postal surveys among Aboriginal people., Methods: The first 100,000 participants from the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study, a large scale cohort study, were posted a follow-up questionnaire gathering general demographic, health and risk factor data, emphasising Social, Economic and Environmental Factors ("The SEEF Study"). For each variable of interest, percentages of those invited who went on to participate in follow-up were tabulated separately for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal participants and age- and sex-adjusted participation rate ratios (aPRR) were calculated., Results: Of the 692 Aboriginal and 97,178 non-Aboriginal invitees to the study, 314 Aboriginal (45 %) and 59,175 non-Aboriginal (61 %) individuals responded. While Aboriginal people were less likely to respond than non-Aboriginal people (aPRR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.66-0.78), factors related to response were similar. Follow-up study participants were more likely than non-participants to have university versus no educational qualifications (1.6, 1.3-2.0 [Aboriginal]; 1.5, 1.5-1.5 [non-Aboriginal]) and an annual income of ≥70,000 versus < $20,000 (1.6, 1.3-2.0; 1.2, 1.2-1.3 [χ (2) = 7.7; p = 0.001]). Current smokers (0.55, 0.42-0.72; 0.76, 0.74-0.77 [χ (2) = 7.14; p = 0.03]), those reporting poor self-rated health (0.68, 0.47-0.99; 0.65, 0.61-0.69), poor quality of life (0.63, 0.41-0.97; 0.61, 0.57-0.66) and very high psychological distress (0.71, 0.68-0.75 [non-Aboriginal]) were less likely than other cohort members to respond., Conclusions: Relatively large numbers of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal individuals participated in the first 45 and Up Study follow-up suggesting that postal surveys can be used to follow Aboriginal participants in cohort studies. Despite somewhat greater loss to follow-up in Aboriginal people (after considering socio-demographic and health characteristics), factors related to follow-up participation were similar in both groups: greater loss was observed in those experiencing disadvantage, ill-health and health risk, with implications for interpretation of future findings. Aboriginal low income earners and current regular smokers had a particularly elevated likelihood of non-participation compared to non-Aboriginal people. These findings highlight the importance of identifying and addressing barriers to participation among hard-to-reach population groups.

Background: Physical activity (PA) surveillance is an important component of non-communicable disease risk factor monitoring, and occurs through national and international surveillance systems. This review identifies population PA estimates for adults in the Asia-Pacific region, and examines variation in trends and prevalence rates obtained using different PA measures., Methods: Data were obtained from a MEDLINE search; World Health Organization's Global Health Infobase; Government websites and reference lists of relevant papers. Inclusion criteria included: national studies or those reporting large scale population-level data; data published from 2000 to 2010 and trend data prior; sample sizes over n = 1000, or fewer subjects in small nations., Results: In total, 56 population surveys from 29 Asia-Pacific countries were identified. Data on 'sufficient physical activity' amongst adults were available from 45 studies (80%), with estimates ranging from 7% to 93% (median 62%, inter-quartile range 40%-85%). For 14 countries, estimates of 'sufficient activity' were documented in multiple surveys using different methods, with the largest variation from 18% to 92% in Nepal. Median or mean MET-minutes/day, reported in 20 studies, ranged from 6 to 1356. Serial trend data were available for 11 countries (22%), for periods spanning 2-10 years. Of these, five countries demonstrated increases in physical activity over time, four demonstrated decreases and three showed no changes., Conclusions: Many countries in the Asia-Pacific region collect population-level PA data. This review highlights differences in estimates within and between countries. Some differences may be real, others due to variation in the PA questions asked and survey methods used. Use of standardized protocols and measures, and combined reporting of data are essential goals of improved international PA surveillance.