To be or not to be Indigenous? Understanding the rise of Australia’s Indigenous population since 1971

Watt, Elizabeth; Kowal, Emma

doi:10.1080/01419870.2018.1546021

Cited by 34 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Incidence rates increased significantly among those from major cities compared to a stable trend in remote/very remote areas. This differential fits with the perception that identification of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in discrete and remote communities has generally been more accurate and consistent than in urban environments until quite recently 27,28 …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Changes in cancer incidence and survival among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia, 1997–2016

Youlden

Baade

McBride

et al. 2021

Pediatric Blood & Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study reports cancer incidence and survival among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and other Australian children, and assesses changes over time. Procedure Data were from the population‐based Australian Childhood Cancer Registry. The study comprised children aged under 15 diagnosed between 1997 and 2016 and with mortality follow‐up until 31 December 2017. Incidence trends were analysed using JoinPoint regression. Five‐year cancer‐specific survival was calculated using the semi‐complete approach with survival comparisons made using multivariable flexible parametric models. Results Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children accounted for 506 of 13,299 eligible cases (3.8%). Incidence rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children across the study period increased by 2.3% annually (95% confidence interval [CI]: +0.6% to +4.0%) and for other Australian children increased by 0.6% annually (95% CI: +0.3% to +0.9%; p = .05). Nonetheless, cancer incidence was consistently lower for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, with an incidence rate ratio of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.62–0.85; p < .01) between 2012 and 2016. Survival for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children with solid tumours was 70.6% (95% CI: 62.5%–77.3%) and for other Australian children was 83.5% (95% CI: 82.3%–84.7%; p < .01), with indications of this difference diminishing in recent years. Conclusions Improvements in identification, particularly in urban areas, most likely accounts for the greater increase in cancer incidence rates among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. Examination of data on stage at diagnosis and treatment may provide important insights into survival for children with solid tumours.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Changes in cancer incidence and survival among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia, 1997–2016

Youlden

Baade

McBride

et al. 2021

Pediatric Blood & Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…And research currently shows that an increasing number of individuals in North America and Australia now self-classify as Indigenous (Markham and Biddle 2018;Gaudry and Leroux 2017;Leroux 2019;Watt and Kowal 2018). Survey research in North America and Australia has documented how some individuals are eager to find Indigenous DNA and claim some Indigenous heritage as a means of adopting new identities, for profit, to justify a feeling of differentness or uniqueness, to feel more connected to their place of inhabitance, or to alleviate some of the negative sensations of colonialism (Duster 2016;Roth and Ivemark 2019;Watt and Kowal 2019). Despite extensive research and commentary illustrating why using DNA testing as a means to claim or justify a link to Indigenous culture and heritage is problematic (TallBear 2013; TallBear 2014; Keene, Nagle, and Pierce 2018; CBC Radio 2016; Jago 2019), this research shows cases of individuals doing just that.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The consumer representation of DNA ancestry testing on YouTube

Marcon

Rachul

Caulfield

2020

New Genetics and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growth of consumer DNA ancestry testing has resulted in questions and critiques being raised in social and research contexts. This study examined individuals discussing their ancestry DNA testing results on YouTube by searching for the two most popular testing companies (23andMe; Ancestry) and the phrase "DNA results." The finalized dataset consisted of 117 videos, on which directed content analysis was performed. In the videos, individuals used results to clarify, confirm, question, and re-evaluate their previously held conceptions of racial/ethnic identities. Reactions were more positive than negative (88.1% vs. 8.1%), and results more commonly reaffirmed (77.8%) than re-conceptualized (40.0%) one's racial/ethnic identity. Ancestry testing and personal social media accounts were commonly promoted, demonstrating biotechnological hype where promotion abounds and critiques are scarce. Questions persist around the impact of ancestry DNA testing in reifying a scientifically inaccurate conception of race and what impact YouTube videos might have on audiences.

show abstract

“…Census data is typically used for weighting, but indigenous identification in Census data is not always accurate (for example, higher item non-response) [ 39 ]. Critically, a person’s indigenous status—which is almost always self-reported—is not always consistent across time, dependent in large part on the societal expectations and biases towards indigenous persons at a point in time [ 40 , 41 ]. In terms of asking ethnic identity questions in population oral health surveys (the numerator), those collecting data need to be trained to use consistent questions (ideally matching those used in a government Census) and to deliver them in culturally sensitive ways, that is, in ways that are respectful of, and informed by, indigenous norms and expectations [ 42 ].…”

Section: Main Textmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in identifying indigenous peoples in population oral health surveys: a commentary

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are currently 370 million persons identifying as indigenous across 90 countries globally. Indigenous peoples generally face substantial exclusion/marginalization and poorer health status compared with non-indigenous majority populations; this includes poorer oral health status and reduced access to dental services. Population-level oral health surveys provide data to set priorities, inform policies, and monitor progress in dental disease experience/dental service utilisation over time. Rigorously and comprehensively measuring the oral health burden of indigenous populations is an ethical issue, though, given that survey instruments and sampling procedures are usually not sufficiently inclusive. This results in substantial underestimation or even biased estimation of dental disease rates and severity among indigenous peoples, making it difficult for policy makers to prioritise resources in this area. The methodological challenges identified include: (1) suboptimal identification of indigenous populations; (2) numerator-denominator bias and; (3) statistical analytic considerations. We suggest solutions that can be implemented to strengthen the visibility of indigenous peoples around the world in an oral health context. These include acknowledgment of the need to engage indigenous peoples with all data-related processes, encouraging the use of indigenous identifiers in national and regional data sets, and mitigating and/or carefully assessing biases inherent in population oral health methodologies for indigenous peoples.

show abstract

To be or not to be Indigenous? Understanding the rise of Australia’s Indigenous population since 1971

Cited by 34 publications

References 26 publications

Changes in cancer incidence and survival among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia, 1997–2016

Changes in cancer incidence and survival among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia, 1997–2016

The consumer representation of DNA ancestry testing on YouTube

Challenges in identifying indigenous peoples in population oral health surveys: a commentary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About