As the first objective of this review is to simply identify and report on those tools that have been used to date to measure QoL and wellbeing in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian peoples rather than synthesise the results of the studies that have used the tools, a detailed PICo has not been presented to directly correspond to this objective. All studies that report on QoL or wellbeing in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian peoples will be retrieved to identify which tool has been employed. The following PICo elements will be used to address objective two of this review.
Types of participants
This review will consider studies that include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Phenomena of interest
The phenomena of interest for objective two is how Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples perceive quality of life and wellbeing.
The review will consider studies conducted in Australia.
Types of studies
For objective one, all qualitative and quantitative studies identifying tools used to measure QoL or wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples will be considered.
For objective two, the review will consider studies that focus on qualitative data including, but not limited to, designs such as phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, action research and feminist research.
The search strategy aims to find both published and unpublished studies. A three-step search strategy will be utilised in this review. An initial limited search of MEDLINE and CINAHL will be undertaken followed by analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract, and of the index terms used to describe article. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms will then be undertaken across all included databases. Thirdly, the reference list of all identified reports and articles will be searched for additional studies.
The databases to be searched include:
The search for unpublished studies will include:
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies
Australian Indigenous Health InfoNet
Initial keywords to be used will be:
Indigenous Australian; Aboriginal; Aborigine; Torres Strait Islander; quality of life; personal satisfaction; values; wellbeing; traditional healers; ngangkari; maparn; ngurra; tjurkurrpa; walytja; Kanyini; Kanyirninpa; Danalaig; beliefs; social capital; resilience; self-determinant; connectedness; cultural respect; cultural integrity; cultural continuity
Assessment of methodological quality
No appraisal will be undertaken for objective one. Tools used to measure QoL and wellbeing will be identified and described leaving the quality of the studies that use the tools as incidental.
For objective two qualitative papers selected for retrieval will be assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological validity prior to inclusion in the review using the standardized critical appraisal instrument, the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-QARI) (Appendix I). Any disagreements that arise between the reviewers will be resolved through discussion or with a third reviewer.
For objective one, descriptive information on the tool used to measure the QoL or wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples will be extracted, including the name of the tool, the domains of QoL and wellbeing, the number of items, the scale of measure used, the year developed and whether or not validated.
For objective two qualitative data will be extracted from papers included in the review using the standardized data extraction tool from JBI-QARI (Appendix II). The data extracted will include specific details about the interventions, populations, study methods and outcomes of significance to the review question and specific objectives.
For objective one information about each tool will be displayed in tabular format with narrative where required.
For objective two qualitative research findings will, where possible, be pooled using JBI-QARI. This will involve the aggregation or synthesis of findings to generate a set of statements that represent that aggregation, through assembling the findings rated according to their quality, and categorizing these findings on the basis of similarity in meaning. These categories are then subjected to a meta-synthesis in order to produce a single comprehensive set of synthesised findings that can be used as a basis for evidence-based practice. Where textual pooling is not possible the findings will be presented in narrative form.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
This systematic literature review is part of work which is supported by a Centre for Research Excellence grant from the Australian Primary Health Care Research Institute.
1. Bérenger V, Verdier-Chouchane A. Multidimensional measures of well-being: standard of living and quality of life
across countries. World Development. 2007;35(7):1259-76.
2. Barcaccia B, Esposito G, Matarese M, Bertolaso M, Elvira M, De Marinis MG. Defining Quality of Life
: A Wild-Goose Chase? 2013;9(1):185-203.
4. Costanza R, Fisher B, Ali S, Beer C, Bond L, Boumans R, et al. Quality of life
: An approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being. 2007;61(2):267-76.
5. Haas BK. Clarification and Integration of Similar Quality of Life
6. Group W. The World Health Organization quality of life
assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization. 1995;41(10):1403-9.
7. Fagerlind H, Ring L, Brülde B, Feltelius N, Lindblad ÅK. Patients' understanding of the concepts of health and quality of life
8. Wood-dauphinee S. Assessing quality of life
in clinical research: from where have we come and where are we going? 1999;52(4):355.
9. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life
10. Herdman M, Fox-Rushby J, Badia X. 'Equivalence' and the translation and adaptation of health-related quality of life
11. Van Widenfelt BM, Treffers PD, De Beurs E, Siebelink BM, Koudijs E. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of assessment instruments used in psychological research with children and families. Clinical child and family psychology review. 2005;8(2):135-47.
12. Traube D, Dukay V, Kaaya S, Reyes H, Mellins C. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Child Depression Inventory for use in Tanzania with children affected by HIV. 2010;5(2):174-87.
13. Canino G, Alegría M. Psychiatric diagnosis - is it universal or relative to culture? 2008;49(3):237-50.
14. Archibald L. Decolonization and healing: Indigenous experiences in the United States, New Zealand, Australia and Greenland: Aboriginal
Healing Foundation; 2006.
15. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE. The MOS short-form general health survey: reliability and validity in a patient population. Medical care. 1988:724-35.
16. Maher P. A review of 'Traditional' Aboriginal
. Australian Journal of Rural Health. 1999;7(4):229-36.
17. Vicary DA, Bishop BJ. Western psychotherapeutic practice: engaging Aboriginal
people in culturally appropriate and respectful ways. Perth, Western Australia: Curtin University of Technology; 2005.
18. Grieves V. Aboriginal
philosophy, the basis of Aboriginal
social and emotional wellbeing
: Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal
Health Casuarina, NT; 2009.
19. Brown A.(2009). Kurunpa [Spirit]: Exploring the Psychosocial Determinants of Coronary Heart Disease among Indigenous men in Central Australia PhD Thesis, School of Population Health, The University of Queensland. Brisbane
Appendix I: Appraisal instruments
QARI appraisal instrument
Appendix II: Data extraction instruments
QARI data extraction instrument