Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's domains of wellbeing: A comprehensive literature review. (July 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Butler, Tamara L.; Anderson, Kate; Garvey, Gail; Cunningham, Joan; Ratcliffe, Julie; Tong, Allison; Whop, Lisa J.; Cass, Alan; Dickson, Michelle; Howard, Kirsten
• Is Part Of: Social science & medicine. Volume 233(2019)
• Page Start: 138
• Page End: 157
• Publication Date: 2019-07
• Subjects: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people -- Indigenous Australians -- First Nations -- Australian -- Wellbeing -- Quality of life -- Domains -- Comprehensive literature review; Social medicine -- Periodicals; Medical anthropology -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; Psychology -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine sociale -- Périodiques; Anthropologie médicale -- Périodiques; Santé publique -- Périodiques; Psychologie -- Périodiques; Médecine -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 362.105
• DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.06.004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0277-9536

Abstract

Abstract: There are significant health and social disparities between the world's Indigenous and non-Indigenous people on factors likely to influence quality of life (QOL) and wellbeing. However, these disparities in wellbeing are not captured in conventional QOL instruments, as they often do not include dimensions that are likely to be relevant to Indigenous people. The objective of this comprehensive literature review was to identify these wellbeing domains for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia (hereafter, respectfully referred to collectively as Indigenous Australians). We searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Econlit, CINAHL, and Embase (from inception to June 2017, and updated in March 2019), and grey literature sources using keywords relating to adult Indigenous Australians' QOL and wellbeing. From 278 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 95 were included in a thematic analysis. This synthesis revealed nine broad interconnected wellbeing dimensions: autonomy, empowerment and recognition; family and community; culture, spirituality and identity; Country; basic needs; work, roles and responsibilities; education; physical health; and mental health. The findings suggest domains of wellbeing relevant to and valued by Indigenous Australians that may not be included in existing QOL and wellbeing instruments, domains that may be shared with Indigenous populations globally. This indicates the need for a tailored wellbeing instrument that includes factors relevant to Indigenous Australians. Developing such an instrument will ensure meaningful, culturally-relevant measurement of Indigenous Australians' wellbeing. Highlights: Indigenous Australians' wellbeing must be measured with culturally appropriate tools. Existing tools do not appear to include domains relevant to Indigenous Australians. A comprehensive review identified nine domains unique to Indigenous Australians. A wellbeing tool including domains relevant to Indigenous Australians is required. Wellbeing domains relevant to Indigenous peoples globally remain to be identified.