Aim: We aim to promote discussion about an Indigenous Cultural Identity of Research Authors Standard (ICIRAS) for academic journal publications. Context: This is based on a gap in research publishing practice where Indigenous peoples' identity is not systematically and rigorously flagged in rural health research publications. There are widespread reforms, in different research areas, to counter the reputation of scientific research as a vehicle of racism and discrimination against the world's Indigenous peoples. Reflecting on these broader movements, the editorial teams of three rural health journals-the Australian Journal of Rural Health, the Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine, and Rural and Remote Health-recognised that Indigenous peoples' identity could be embedded in authorship details. Approach: An environmental scan (through a cultural safety lens where Indigenous cultural authority is respected, valued, and empowered) of literature was undertaken to detect the signs of inclusion of Indigenous peoples in research. This revealed many ways in which editorial boards of Journals could systematically improve their process so that there is 'nothing about Indigenous people, without Indigenous people' in rural health research publications. Conclusion: Improving the health and wellbeing of Indigenous peoples worldwide requires high quality research evidence. The philosophy of cultural safety supports the purposeful positioning of Indigenous peoples within the kaleidoscope of cultural knowledges as identified contributors and authors of research evidence. The ICIRAS is a call-to-action for research journals and institutions to rigorously improve publication governance that signals "Editing with IndigenUs and for IndigenUs".

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ (hereafter respectfully referred to as Indigenous Australians) experiences of health care are shaped by historical, social and cultural factors, with cultural security critical to effective care provision and engagement between services and community. Positive patient experiences are associated with better health outcomes. Consequently, it is an accreditation requirement that primary health care (PHC) services must formally gather and respond to patient feedback. However, currently available patient feedback tools were not developed with Indigenous Australians, and do not reflect their values and world views. Existing tools do not capture important experiences of care of Indigenous Australians in PHC settings, nor return information that assists services to improve care. Consistent with the principles of Indigenous Data Sovereignty, we will co-design and validate an Indigenous-specific Patient Reported Experience Measure (PREM) that produces data by and for community, suitable for use in quality improvement in comprehensive PHC services. This paper presents the protocol of the study, outlining the rationale, methodologies and associated activities that are being applied in developing the PREM. Briefly, guided by an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Group, our team of Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers, service providers and policy makers will use a combination of Indigenous methodologies, participatory, and traditional western techniques for scale development. We will engage PHC service staff and communities in eight selected sites across remote, regional, and metropolitan communities in Australia for iterative cycles of data collection and feedback throughout the research process. Yarning Circles with community members will identify core concepts to develop an “Experience of Care Framework”, which will be used to develop items for the PREM. Staff members will be interviewed regarding desirable characteristics and feasibility considerations for the PREM. The PREM will undergo cognitive and psychometric testing.

Aims: This paper describes the investments made, approaches taken and lessons learnt by three rural Australian academic health departments engaged in the delivery of the Health Career Academy Program (HCAP). The program seeks to address the under-representation of rural, remote and Aboriginal populations within Australia's health workforce. Context: Significant resources are directed towards rural practice exposure for metropolitan health students to address workforce shortages. Fewer resources are directed towards health career strategies that focus on the earlier engagement of rural, remote and Aboriginal secondary school students, those in Years 7-10. Best practice career development principles highlight the importance of earlier engagement in the promotion of health career aspirations and in influencing secondary school student career intentions and uptake of health professions. Approach: This paper describes: delivery contexts; the theory and evidence that has informed the HCAP; program design, adaptability and scalability; program focus on priming the rural health career pipeline; program alignment to best practice career development principles; enablers and barriers confronted in program delivery, and lessons learnt to inform rural health workforce policy and resourcing. Conclusion: There is a need to invest in programs that seek to attract rural, remote and Aboriginal secondary school students to health professions if Australia is to develop a sustainable rural health workforce. A failure to invest earlier undermines opportunities to engage diverse and aspiring youth in Australia's health workforce. Program contributions, approaches and lessons learnt can inform the work of other agencies seeking to include these populations in health career initiatives.

Issue addressed: This paper aims to report findings of a scoping review which mapped and summarised available literature regarding Aboriginal peoples’ use of Dose Administration Aids (DAAs) for improved medication management.Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have higher rates of chronic disease than other Australians. This leads to increased numbers of prescribed medications and complex medication taking regimens. The Australian Government and Pharmacy Bodies provide programs for Aboriginal peoples with chronic conditions, including programs supporting access to DAAs to improve medication adherence.Methods: The search strings used included three key concepts: Indigeneity; DAAs and outcomes. PubMed, Medline via Ovid and the grey literature were searched.Results: After removal of duplicates, 426 papers were screened by title and abstract for inclusion. A further 407 papers were then excluded leaving a total of nineteen papers included in the review. Only three of these papers included all three concepts in the search criteria, and none of these were empirical studies.Conclusion: The lack of studies found in this review support the requirement for empirical research regarding the effects of DAAs on medication taking behaviours of Aboriginal people, and the programs that provide them.So What?: The Australian Government funds programs that provides access to DAAs as a method of improving medication taking behaviours. But what do we really know about DAAs and if or how they assist in this goal? This review scopes out what is known, in order to direct studies that will answer this question.

Objectives: The Validating Outcomes by Including Consumer Experience (VOICE) project is developing patient reported experience measure (PREM) tools to collect consumer feedback for Indigenous primary healthcare (IPHC) services’ accreditation and quality improvement processes. This study aimed to explore the views of health service staff about: (1) optimising the feasibility of collection, analysis and interpretation of findings; and (2) resourcing requirements for implementation of the PREM. Design: A participatory action research qualitative study design, guided by an Indigenous advisory group. Our team of Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers conducted semistructured focus groups and individual interviews with IPHC staff. Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Multiple sense-making meetings were conducted with the Indigenous advisory group. Setting: Eight partner IPHC services across four Australian states and territories. Participants: All staff were eligible and invited to participate in the study via purposive and snowball sampling. Administrative staff (eg, receptionist, programme facilitator), clinicians/practitioners (eg, general practitioner, nurse, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health workers and practitioners) and service managers (eg, CEO, practice manager) from partner health services participated. Results: 63 staff participated; 44 attended across 13 focus groups, with the remainder participating in individual interviews. The majority of participants were between 35 years and 55 years old (52%), female (66%) and working in frontline IPHC service delivery roles (56%). Equal numbers identified as Indigenous (50%) and non-Indigenous (50%). Many had worked in the Indigenous health and well-being sector for over 10 years (40%). ‘Culturally safe care’ and ‘accountability’ were identified as primary themes and key reasons for gathering consumer feedback. Subthemes identified were ‘Relationships’, ‘trust and respect’, ‘communication about consumer feedback’, ‘timing and frequency of requesting consumer feedback’, ‘health service systems’, ‘health service and staff capacity’, ‘staff skills’ and ‘structure and administration of the PREM’. All themes and subthemes need to be considered for the successful design and implementation of PREMs in IPHC settings. Conclusion: Many of the issues identified are not currently considered in the process of collecting PREM data for accreditation yet, if addressed, would likely improve the quality and relevance of data collected. The findings from this study will inform the co-design and validation of Indigenous-specific PREM tools to collect consumer feedback. Critically, service and community input will ensure the PREM tools meet service needs for continuous quality improvement and accreditation and reflect the priorities and values of Indigenous peoples.

Background/Objectives: University Department of Rural Health (UDRH) programs were created to address the disparities in rural Australian communities. A large proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people live in rural communities, and the UDRHs work closely with communities to improve outcomes for Indigenous Australians. This narrative review examines the nature of the intervention papers in Australian Indigenous health published by UDRHs and identifies key learnings to improve interventions in Australian Indigenous health. Methods: Intervention papers were identified from an established database of UDRH Indigenous health-related publications published 2010–2021. Results: Thirty-three papers were included in the review. Thematic analysis identified four overarching themes from the key learnings identified in the papers: (1) principles of engagement and design; (2) considerations for improving healthcare systems; (3) considerations for improving healthcare workforce; and (4) the sustainability of interventions and improvements in outcomes. Most of the studies employed qualitative or mixed-methods designs. Conclusions: These findings provide practical guidance for strengthening Indigenous health interventions. Effective Indigenous health interventions require meaningful community engagement and co-design, culturally safe practice supported by workforce training, and multicomponent approaches that address social determinants and barriers to access. Sustained impact depends on adequate resourcing, strong organisation leadership and embedding programs within healthcare systems with clear pathways for ongoing care and capacity building. UDRHs should reflect on current and future projects to ensure that engagement principles, system-level considerations, health workforce development, and long-term sustainability are embedded within intervention design and implementation.