MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308589041 · doi:10.1080/00050067.2022.2130026

Cultural interventions that target mental health and wellbeing for First Nations Australians: a systematic review

2022· review· en· W4308589041 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Psychologist · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychological interventionPsychologyGlobal mental healthPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The continuity of Australian First Nations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) culture has been threatened by colonisation and effects of this continue to have devastating impacts on their social emotional wellbeing [SEWB], especially mental health. This review analyses cultural interventions aiming to improve mental health outcomes for First Nations Australians (e.g., mood, self-esteem, suicide-attempts, self-harm, risky behaviours) to uncover the effectiveness and key components of such interventions. Method: Databases PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, EMCARE, LIt.search tool from Lowitja Inst, Australian Indigenous Health InfoNet and Google Scholar were searched. Studies published between 2000 and 2021 which reported the impact of cultural interventions on the mental health of First Nations Australians were included. Results: From 172 studies, only eight studies met inclusion criteria and all improved measured domains of SEWB. Six studies evaluated culturally adapted interventions (i.e., Western interventions adapted to be culturally appropriate) and two evaluated culturally grounded interventions (i.e., interventions developed by First Nations Australians). Participants called for more cultural components in culturally adapted interventions. The most successful studies used collaborative and participatory approaches in the designs, included First Nations members in their research teams and presented culturally grounded interventions. Conclusions: The paucity of literature limit findings. There was a limited ability to identify key mechanisms of change across some intervention studies, and large outcome variations across studies meant some aspects could not be compared. Nonetheless, this review concludes that culturally grounded interventions are the most promising and successful mental health interventions currently available for First Nations Australians which has many implications for practice and funding.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.211
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it