A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality and their outcomes

Abstract

BackgroundCommunity development is a health promotion approach identified as having great potential to improve Indigenous health, because of its potential for extensive community participation. There has been no systematic examination of the extent of community participation in community development projects and little analysis of their effectiveness. This systematic review aims to identify the extent of community participation in community development projects implemented in Australian Indigenous communities, critically appraise the qualitative and quantitative methods used in their evaluation, and summarise their outcomes.MethodsTen electronic peer-reviewed databases and two electronic grey literature databases were searched for relevant studies published between 1990 and 2015. The level of community participation and the methodological quality of the qualitative and quantitative components of the studies were assessed against standardised criteria.ResultsThirty one evaluation studies of community development projects were identified. Community participation varied between different phases of project development, generally high during project implementation, but low during the evaluation phase. For the majority of studies, methodological quality was low and the methods were poorly described. Although positive qualitative or quantitative outcomes were reported in all studies, only two studies reported statistically significant outcomes.Discussion Partnerships between researchers, community members and service providers have great potential to improve methodological quality and community participation when research skills and community knowledge are integrated to design, implement and evaluate community development projects.ConclusionThe methodological quality of studies evaluating Australian Indigenous community development projects is currently too weak to confidently determine the cost-effectiveness of community development projects in improving the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Australians. Higher quality studies evaluating community development projects would strengthen the evidence base.

The Feasibility of Embedding Data Collection into the Routine Service Delivery of a Multi-Component Program for High-Risk Young People

“…This finding mirrors those from other fields engaged in complex social or health interventions, and is likely a direct result of the complexity, cost and time involved in evaluating these types of programs, and that the focus of most service staff is on the day-to-day delivery of their program, not conducting scientifically rigorous evaluation [16,17,18]. …”

Research on the Hybrid ANP-FCE Approach of Urban Community Sustainable Construction Problem

“…With the deepening of research, people pay more attention to the humanistic environment of the community, and along with the proposal of green communities and ecological communities, the standards for the buildings have also changed. Some research findings indicate that community sustainable development is correlated with improvements in elite participation [38], social services, community life, cultural identity [29], and community participation [31,32,39]. The building standard needs to meet the requirements of green building [28], especially the aspects of energy efficient and building function [40].…”

“…Higher degree of informatization improves residents' information reception speed [27,30] C35: Community security Community safety can effectively protect residents' safety [18,27] C36: Community participation Extensive community involvement can improve community governance [31,32] C4: Building performance C41: Building structural Building structure design is beautiful and reasonable to enhance the beauty of buildings [22] C42: Building function Perfect building function can protect residents' needs [22,28] C43: Building quality The quality of the building is intact to ensure the safety of residents [16,22] C44: Floor area ratio A small volume ratio means fewer floors and better indoor lighting. [27,33] C45: Building density Small building density ensures that the building spacing is large, resulting in a higher greening rate [27,30] rate, community residents crime level, public participation, and the number of higher education students.…”

Peer-led Aboriginal parent support: Program development for vulnerable populations with participatory action research

“…A recent systematic review identified that effective partnerships between researchers, Aboriginal community members and service providers support Aboriginal people's participation in research, thereby improving quality of the investigations (Snijder et al, 2015). Furthermore, Bainbridge et al (2015) emphasise the need for non-Aboriginal researchers to engage with Aboriginal people to increase the meaningfulness, applicability and sustainability of research by taking into consideration Aboriginal ethics and values.…”