Search

Abstract Background Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians experience persistent health and social inequities. Chronic conditions, many of which are diet-related, are leading contributors to the burden of disease and health inequity in Australia. First Nations Peoples have the right to be involved in all policy decisions affecting them. This review aimed to synthesise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ concerns and priorities about food and nutrition in order to inform policies to improve health equity. Methods MEDLINE, CINAHL, Informit and Google Scholar were systematically searched to identify qualitative studies–published from January 2008–that included data from Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander Peoples about their concerns and priorities related to food and nutrition. Data were extracted from included studies using a pre-determined template and study quality was assessed using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool. Qualitative findings were synthesised using inductive thematic analysis and categorised based on an ecological model of health. Results Twenty-one studies were included. Key factors influencing food and nutrition were identified across all levels of the ecological framework. These included interpersonal and institutional racism, junk food availability and marketing, food accessibility and affordability, housing conditions, food knowledge and cooking skills, and connection to family and culture. Conclusions Documenting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ lived experiences of the colonised food system is one step necessary for informing policy to tackle food and nutrition inequities. Based on existing qualitative research, food and nutrition policymakers should prioritise building a supportive food environment by focusing on self-determination; ensuring access to healthy, affordable food and safe housing; and by eliminating systemic racism.

Introduction TikTok has over one billion monthly users and is particularly popular among children. We examined the (1) use of owned media by major unhealthy food and non-alcoholic beverage brands on TikTok and (2) nature of branded hashtag challenges instigated by such brands and the user-generated content created in response.Methods We assessed the (1) content of all videos posted on the accounts of 16 top food and non-alcoholic beverage brands (based on global brand share) as at 30 June 2021, and (2) content and sentiment of a sample of brand-relevant user-generated content created in response to branded hashtag challenges instigated by these brands.Results Of 539 videos posted by brands, 60% were posted in the first half of 2021. The most common marketing strategies were branding (87% of videos), product images (85%), engagement (31%) and celebrities/influencers (25%). Engagement included instigation of branded hashtag challenges that encouraged creation of user-generated content featuring brands’ products, brands’ videos and/or branded effects. The total collective views of user-generated content from single challenges ranged from 12.7 million to 107.9 billion. Of a sample of 626 brand-relevant videos generated in response to these challenges, 96% featured branding, 68% product images and 41% branded effects. Most portrayed a positive (73%) or neutral/unclear (25%) sentiment, with few negative (3%).Conclusion Unhealthy food and non-alcoholic beverage brands are using TikTok to market brands and products via their own accounts and to encourage users to create and share their own content that features branding and product images. Given TikTok’s popularity among children, this study supports the need for policies that protect children from the harmful impact of food marketing on social networking platforms.

Systems thinking is increasingly applied to understand and address systemic drivers of complex health problems. In Australia, group model building, a participatory method from systems science, has been applied in various locations to engage communities in systems-based health promotion projects. To date there is limited evidence regarding GMB use with Australian Aboriginal communities. This study aimed to determine the value and acceptability of group model building (GMB) as a methodological approach in research with Aboriginal communities and identify any adaptations required to optimise its utility. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 18 Aboriginal health and university staff who had prior experience with a GMB research project. Interview transcripts were inductively analysed using thematic analysis and key themes were organised using an Indigenous research framework. Participants reported that GMB methods generally aligned well with Aboriginal ways of knowing, being, and doing. Participants valued the holistic, visual and collaborative nature of the method and its emphasis on sharing stories and collective decision-making. Group model building was viewed as a useful tool for identifying Aboriginal-led actions to address priority issues and advancing self-determination. Our findings suggest that by bringing together Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal knowledge, GMB is a promising tool, which Aboriginal communities could utilise to explore and address complex problems in a manner that is consistent with their worldviews. In adapting group model building methods, non-Aboriginal researchers should aspire to move beyond co-design processes and enable Aboriginal health research to be entirely led by Aboriginal people.