Social and emotional wellbeing assessment instruments for use with Indigenous Australians: A critical review

There is growing recognition that in addition to universally recognised domains and indicators of wellbeing (such as population health and life expectancy), additional frameworks are required to fully explain and measure Indigenous wellbeing. In particular, Indigenous Australian wellbeing is largely...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Social science & medicine (1982) 2017-08, Vol.187, p.164-173
Hauptverfasser: Le Grande, M., Ski, C.F., Thompson, D.R., Scuffham, P., Kularatna, S., Jackson, A.C., Brown, A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 173
container_issue
container_start_page 164
container_title Social science & medicine (1982)
container_volume 187
creator Le Grande, M.
Ski, C.F.
Thompson, D.R.
Scuffham, P.
Kularatna, S.
Jackson, A.C.
Brown, A.
description There is growing recognition that in addition to universally recognised domains and indicators of wellbeing (such as population health and life expectancy), additional frameworks are required to fully explain and measure Indigenous wellbeing. In particular, Indigenous Australian wellbeing is largely determined by colonisation, historical trauma, grief, loss, and ongoing social marginalisation. Dominant mainstream indicators of wellbeing based on the biomedical model may therefore be inadequate and not entirely relevant in the Indigenous context. It is possible that “standard” wellbeing instruments fail to adequately assess indicators of health and wellbeing within societies that have a more holistic view of health. The aim of this critical review was to identify, document, and evaluate the use of social and emotional wellbeing measures within the Australian Indigenous community. The instruments were systematically described regarding their intrinsic properties (e.g., generic v. disease-specific, domains assessed, extent of cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric characteristics) and their purpose of utilisation in studies (e.g., study setting, intervention, clinical purpose or survey). We included 33 studies, in which 22 distinct instruments were used. Three major categories of social and emotional wellbeing instruments were identified: unmodified standard instruments (10), cross-culturally adapted standard instruments (6), and Indigenous developed measures (6). Recommendations are made for researchers and practitioners who assess social and emotional wellbeing in Indigenous Australians, which may also be applicable to other minority groups where a more holistic framework of wellbeing is applied. It is advised that standard instruments only be used if they have been subject to a formal cross-cultural adaptation process, and Indigenous developed measures continue to be developed, refined, and validated within a diverse range of research and clinical settings. •Indigenous wellbeing is best understood within a holistic framework.•Historical trauma and grief are strong determinants of current wellbeing.•A construct of social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB) is most appropriate.•Cross-cultural adaptation of existing wellbeing instruments is required.•Further work is required to develop valid SEWB instruments for Indigenous people.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.06.046
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1917665655</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0277953617304227</els_id><sourcerecordid>1917665655</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-2c3c75f7447416d474fcca5d12a738cedc10da2ae3537ed863fc0b25fcacbd043</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEFv1DAQhS0EotvCXwAfuSSM49jOcltVBSpV4gCcLa89KV4ldvEkrPj3eLUt115sj_zmzbyPsfcCWgFCfzy0lD35OGNoOxCmBd1Cr1-wjRiMbJTszUu2gc6YZqukvmCXRAcAEDDI1-yiG_SwhS1s2PQ9--gm7lLgOOcl5lSrI07THmO6544IiWZMC4-JlrKensTHXPhKyI9x-cVvU4j3mPJKfLdWjZuiS_SJ77gvcYm-Ghb8E_H4hr0a3UT49vG-Yj8_3_y4_trcfftye727a3wPsDSdl96o0fS96YUO9Ry9dyqIzhk5eAxeQHCdQ6mkwTBoOXrYd2r0zu8D9PKKfTj7PpT8e0Va7BzJ10wuYd3Siq0wWiutVJWas9SXTFRwtA8lzq78tQLsCbU92P-o7Qm1BW0r6tr57nHIuj_9PfU9sa2C3VmANWqNX2x1wVT3jwX9YkOOzw75B_VKlxk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1917665655</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Social and emotional wellbeing assessment instruments for use with Indigenous Australians: A critical review</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Le Grande, M. ; Ski, C.F. ; Thompson, D.R. ; Scuffham, P. ; Kularatna, S. ; Jackson, A.C. ; Brown, A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Le Grande, M. ; Ski, C.F. ; Thompson, D.R. ; Scuffham, P. ; Kularatna, S. ; Jackson, A.C. ; Brown, A.</creatorcontrib><description>There is growing recognition that in addition to universally recognised domains and indicators of wellbeing (such as population health and life expectancy), additional frameworks are required to fully explain and measure Indigenous wellbeing. In particular, Indigenous Australian wellbeing is largely determined by colonisation, historical trauma, grief, loss, and ongoing social marginalisation. Dominant mainstream indicators of wellbeing based on the biomedical model may therefore be inadequate and not entirely relevant in the Indigenous context. It is possible that “standard” wellbeing instruments fail to adequately assess indicators of health and wellbeing within societies that have a more holistic view of health. The aim of this critical review was to identify, document, and evaluate the use of social and emotional wellbeing measures within the Australian Indigenous community. The instruments were systematically described regarding their intrinsic properties (e.g., generic v. disease-specific, domains assessed, extent of cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric characteristics) and their purpose of utilisation in studies (e.g., study setting, intervention, clinical purpose or survey). We included 33 studies, in which 22 distinct instruments were used. Three major categories of social and emotional wellbeing instruments were identified: unmodified standard instruments (10), cross-culturally adapted standard instruments (6), and Indigenous developed measures (6). Recommendations are made for researchers and practitioners who assess social and emotional wellbeing in Indigenous Australians, which may also be applicable to other minority groups where a more holistic framework of wellbeing is applied. It is advised that standard instruments only be used if they have been subject to a formal cross-cultural adaptation process, and Indigenous developed measures continue to be developed, refined, and validated within a diverse range of research and clinical settings. •Indigenous wellbeing is best understood within a holistic framework.•Historical trauma and grief are strong determinants of current wellbeing.•A construct of social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB) is most appropriate.•Cross-cultural adaptation of existing wellbeing instruments is required.•Further work is required to develop valid SEWB instruments for Indigenous people.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0277-9536</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1873-5347</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5347</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.06.046</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28689090</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Australia ; Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples ; Conceptualisation of health ; Critical review ; Cross-cultural assessment ; Culturally Competent Care - methods ; Depression - etiology ; Depression - psychology ; Health inequalities ; Humans ; Indigenous health ; Population Groups - ethnology ; Population Groups - psychology ; Psychometrics - instrumentation ; Psychometrics - standards ; Quality of life ; Social and emotional wellbeing ; Social Marginalization - psychology</subject><ispartof>Social science &amp; medicine (1982), 2017-08, Vol.187, p.164-173</ispartof><rights>2017 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-2c3c75f7447416d474fcca5d12a738cedc10da2ae3537ed863fc0b25fcacbd043</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-2c3c75f7447416d474fcca5d12a738cedc10da2ae3537ed863fc0b25fcacbd043</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953617304227$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28689090$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Le Grande, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ski, C.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, D.R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scuffham, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kularatna, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jackson, A.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, A.</creatorcontrib><title>Social and emotional wellbeing assessment instruments for use with Indigenous Australians: A critical review</title><title>Social science &amp; medicine (1982)</title><addtitle>Soc Sci Med</addtitle><description>There is growing recognition that in addition to universally recognised domains and indicators of wellbeing (such as population health and life expectancy), additional frameworks are required to fully explain and measure Indigenous wellbeing. In particular, Indigenous Australian wellbeing is largely determined by colonisation, historical trauma, grief, loss, and ongoing social marginalisation. Dominant mainstream indicators of wellbeing based on the biomedical model may therefore be inadequate and not entirely relevant in the Indigenous context. It is possible that “standard” wellbeing instruments fail to adequately assess indicators of health and wellbeing within societies that have a more holistic view of health. The aim of this critical review was to identify, document, and evaluate the use of social and emotional wellbeing measures within the Australian Indigenous community. The instruments were systematically described regarding their intrinsic properties (e.g., generic v. disease-specific, domains assessed, extent of cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric characteristics) and their purpose of utilisation in studies (e.g., study setting, intervention, clinical purpose or survey). We included 33 studies, in which 22 distinct instruments were used. Three major categories of social and emotional wellbeing instruments were identified: unmodified standard instruments (10), cross-culturally adapted standard instruments (6), and Indigenous developed measures (6). Recommendations are made for researchers and practitioners who assess social and emotional wellbeing in Indigenous Australians, which may also be applicable to other minority groups where a more holistic framework of wellbeing is applied. It is advised that standard instruments only be used if they have been subject to a formal cross-cultural adaptation process, and Indigenous developed measures continue to be developed, refined, and validated within a diverse range of research and clinical settings. •Indigenous wellbeing is best understood within a holistic framework.•Historical trauma and grief are strong determinants of current wellbeing.•A construct of social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB) is most appropriate.•Cross-cultural adaptation of existing wellbeing instruments is required.•Further work is required to develop valid SEWB instruments for Indigenous people.</description><subject>Australia</subject><subject>Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples</subject><subject>Conceptualisation of health</subject><subject>Critical review</subject><subject>Cross-cultural assessment</subject><subject>Culturally Competent Care - methods</subject><subject>Depression - etiology</subject><subject>Depression - psychology</subject><subject>Health inequalities</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Indigenous health</subject><subject>Population Groups - ethnology</subject><subject>Population Groups - psychology</subject><subject>Psychometrics - instrumentation</subject><subject>Psychometrics - standards</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Social and emotional wellbeing</subject><subject>Social Marginalization - psychology</subject><issn>0277-9536</issn><issn>1873-5347</issn><issn>1873-5347</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkEFv1DAQhS0EotvCXwAfuSSM49jOcltVBSpV4gCcLa89KV4ldvEkrPj3eLUt115sj_zmzbyPsfcCWgFCfzy0lD35OGNoOxCmBd1Cr1-wjRiMbJTszUu2gc6YZqukvmCXRAcAEDDI1-yiG_SwhS1s2PQ9--gm7lLgOOcl5lSrI07THmO6544IiWZMC4-JlrKensTHXPhKyI9x-cVvU4j3mPJKfLdWjZuiS_SJ77gvcYm-Ghb8E_H4hr0a3UT49vG-Yj8_3_y4_trcfftye727a3wPsDSdl96o0fS96YUO9Ry9dyqIzhk5eAxeQHCdQ6mkwTBoOXrYd2r0zu8D9PKKfTj7PpT8e0Va7BzJ10wuYd3Siq0wWiutVJWas9SXTFRwtA8lzq78tQLsCbU92P-o7Qm1BW0r6tr57nHIuj_9PfU9sa2C3VmANWqNX2x1wVT3jwX9YkOOzw75B_VKlxk</recordid><startdate>20170801</startdate><enddate>20170801</enddate><creator>Le Grande, M.</creator><creator>Ski, C.F.</creator><creator>Thompson, D.R.</creator><creator>Scuffham, P.</creator><creator>Kularatna, S.</creator><creator>Jackson, A.C.</creator><creator>Brown, A.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170801</creationdate><title>Social and emotional wellbeing assessment instruments for use with Indigenous Australians: A critical review</title><author>Le Grande, M. ; Ski, C.F. ; Thompson, D.R. ; Scuffham, P. ; Kularatna, S. ; Jackson, A.C. ; Brown, A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-2c3c75f7447416d474fcca5d12a738cedc10da2ae3537ed863fc0b25fcacbd043</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Australia</topic><topic>Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples</topic><topic>Conceptualisation of health</topic><topic>Critical review</topic><topic>Cross-cultural assessment</topic><topic>Culturally Competent Care - methods</topic><topic>Depression - etiology</topic><topic>Depression - psychology</topic><topic>Health inequalities</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Indigenous health</topic><topic>Population Groups - ethnology</topic><topic>Population Groups - psychology</topic><topic>Psychometrics - instrumentation</topic><topic>Psychometrics - standards</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Social and emotional wellbeing</topic><topic>Social Marginalization - psychology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Le Grande, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ski, C.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, D.R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scuffham, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kularatna, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jackson, A.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Social science &amp; medicine (1982)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Le Grande, M.</au><au>Ski, C.F.</au><au>Thompson, D.R.</au><au>Scuffham, P.</au><au>Kularatna, S.</au><au>Jackson, A.C.</au><au>Brown, A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Social and emotional wellbeing assessment instruments for use with Indigenous Australians: A critical review</atitle><jtitle>Social science &amp; medicine (1982)</jtitle><addtitle>Soc Sci Med</addtitle><date>2017-08-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>187</volume><spage>164</spage><epage>173</epage><pages>164-173</pages><issn>0277-9536</issn><issn>1873-5347</issn><eissn>1873-5347</eissn><abstract>There is growing recognition that in addition to universally recognised domains and indicators of wellbeing (such as population health and life expectancy), additional frameworks are required to fully explain and measure Indigenous wellbeing. In particular, Indigenous Australian wellbeing is largely determined by colonisation, historical trauma, grief, loss, and ongoing social marginalisation. Dominant mainstream indicators of wellbeing based on the biomedical model may therefore be inadequate and not entirely relevant in the Indigenous context. It is possible that “standard” wellbeing instruments fail to adequately assess indicators of health and wellbeing within societies that have a more holistic view of health. The aim of this critical review was to identify, document, and evaluate the use of social and emotional wellbeing measures within the Australian Indigenous community. The instruments were systematically described regarding their intrinsic properties (e.g., generic v. disease-specific, domains assessed, extent of cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric characteristics) and their purpose of utilisation in studies (e.g., study setting, intervention, clinical purpose or survey). We included 33 studies, in which 22 distinct instruments were used. Three major categories of social and emotional wellbeing instruments were identified: unmodified standard instruments (10), cross-culturally adapted standard instruments (6), and Indigenous developed measures (6). Recommendations are made for researchers and practitioners who assess social and emotional wellbeing in Indigenous Australians, which may also be applicable to other minority groups where a more holistic framework of wellbeing is applied. It is advised that standard instruments only be used if they have been subject to a formal cross-cultural adaptation process, and Indigenous developed measures continue to be developed, refined, and validated within a diverse range of research and clinical settings. •Indigenous wellbeing is best understood within a holistic framework.•Historical trauma and grief are strong determinants of current wellbeing.•A construct of social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB) is most appropriate.•Cross-cultural adaptation of existing wellbeing instruments is required.•Further work is required to develop valid SEWB instruments for Indigenous people.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>28689090</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.06.046</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0277-9536
ispartof Social science & medicine (1982), 2017-08, Vol.187, p.164-173
issn 0277-9536
1873-5347
1873-5347
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1917665655
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Australia
Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples
Conceptualisation of health
Critical review
Cross-cultural assessment
Culturally Competent Care - methods
Depression - etiology
Depression - psychology
Health inequalities
Humans
Indigenous health
Population Groups - ethnology
Population Groups - psychology
Psychometrics - instrumentation
Psychometrics - standards
Quality of life
Social and emotional wellbeing
Social Marginalization - psychology
title Social and emotional wellbeing assessment instruments for use with Indigenous Australians: A critical review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T13%3A59%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Social%20and%20emotional%20wellbeing%20assessment%20instruments%20for%20use%20with%20Indigenous%20Australians:%20A%20critical%20review&rft.jtitle=Social%20science%20&%20medicine%20(1982)&rft.au=Le%20Grande,%20M.&rft.date=2017-08-01&rft.volume=187&rft.spage=164&rft.epage=173&rft.pages=164-173&rft.issn=0277-9536&rft.eissn=1873-5347&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.06.046&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1917665655%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1917665655&rft_id=info:pmid/28689090&rft_els_id=S0277953617304227&rfr_iscdi=true