Background The Aotearoa/New Zealand Government is aiming to end the tobacco epidemic and markedly reduce Māori:non-Māori health inequalities by legislating: (1) denicotinisation of retail tobacco, (2) 95% reduction in retail outlets and (c) a tobacco free-generation whereby people born after 2005 are unable to legally purchase tobacco. This paper estimates future smoking prevalence, mortality inequality and health-adjusted life year (HALY) impacts of these strategies. Methods We used a Markov model to estimate future yearly smoking and vaping prevalence, linked to a proportional multistate life table model to estimate future mortality and HALYs. Results The combined package of strategies (plus media promotion) reduced adult smoking prevalence from 31.8% in 2022 to 7.3% in 2025 for Māori, and 11.8% to 2.7% for non-Māori. The 5% smoking prevalence target was forecast to be achieved in 2026 and 2027 for Māori males and females, respectively. The HALY gains for the combined package over the population’s remaining lifespan were estimated to be 594 000 (95% uncertainty interval (UI): 443 000 to 738 000; 3% discount rate). Denicotinisation alone achieved 97% of these HALYs, the retail strategy 19% and tobacco-free generation 12%. By 2040, the combined package was forcat to reduce the gap in Māori:non-Māori all-cause mortality rates for people 45+ years old by 22.9% (95% UI: 19.9% to 26.2%) for females and 9.6% (8.4% to 11.0%) for males. Conclusion A tobacco endgame strategy, especially denicotinisation, could deliver large health benefits and dramatically reduce health inequities between Māori and non-Māori in Aotearoa/New Zealand.

Tobacco smoking is a leading cause of disease and premature mortality among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) Australians. While the daily smoking prevalence among Indigenous Australians has declined significantly from 49% in 2001, it remains about three times higher than that of non-Indigenous Australians (39 and 14%, respectively, for age ≥15 years in 2014–15). This overview of systematic reviews aimed to synthesise evidence about reducing tobacco consumption among Indigenous peoples using a comprehensive framework for Indigenous tobacco control in Australia comprised of the National Tobacco Strategy (NTS) and National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan (NATSIHP) principles and priorities. MEDLINE, EMBASE, systematic review and Indigenous health databases were searched (2000 to Jan 2016) for reviews examining the effects of tobacco control interventions among Indigenous peoples. Two reviewers independently screened reviews, extracted data, and assessed review quality using Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews. Data were synthesised narratively by framework domain. Reporting followed the PRISMA statement. Twenty-one reviews of varying quality were included. There was generally limited Indigenous-specific evidence of effective interventions for reducing smoking; however, many reviewers recommended multifaceted interventions which incorporate Indigenous leadership, partnership and engagement and cultural tailoring. Under the NTS priority areas, reviewers reported evidence for brief smoking cessation interventions and pharmacological support, mass media campaigns (on knowledge and attitudes) and reducing affordability and regulation of tobacco sales. Aspects of intervention implementation related to the NATSIHP domains were less well described and evidence was limited; however, reviewers suggested that cultural tailoring, holistic approaches and building workforce capacity were important strategies to address barriers. There was limited evidence regarding social media and mobile applications, for Indigenous youth, pregnant women and prisoners, and no evidence regarding interventions to protect communities from industry interference, the use of electronic cigarettes, interventions for people experiencing mental illness, juvenile justice, linguistic diversity or ‘pubs, clubs and restaurants’. There is limited Indigenous-specific evidence for most tobacco interventions. A ‘comprehensive approach’ incorporating NTS and NATSIHP Principles and Priorities of partnership and engagement, evidence from other settings, programme logic and responsive evaluation plans may improve intervention acceptability, effectiveness and implementation and mitigate risks of adapting tobacco evidence for Indigenous Australians.

Background The health status and needs of indigenous populations of Australia, Canada and New Zealand are often compared because of the shared experience of colonisation. One enduring impact has been a disproportionately high rate of commercial tobacco use compared with non-indigenous populations. All three countries have ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which acknowledges the harm caused to indigenous peoples by tobacco. Aim and objectives We evaluated and compared reporting on FCTC progress related to indigenous peoples by Australia, Canada and New Zealand as States Parties. The critiqued data included disparities in smoking prevalence between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples; extent of indigenous participation in tobacco control development, implementation and evaluation; and what indigenous commercial tobacco reduction interventions were delivered and evaluated. Data sources We searched FCTC: (1) Global Progress Reports for information regarding indigenous peoples in Australia, Canada and New Zealand; and (2) country-specific reports from Australia, Canada and New Zealand between 2007 and 2016. Study selection Two of the authors independently reviewed the FCTC Global and respective Country Reports, identifying where indigenous search terms appeared. Data extraction All data associated with the identified search terms were extracted, and content analysis was applied. Results It is difficult to determine if or what progress has been made to reduce commercial tobacco use by the three States Parties as part of their commitments under FCTC reporting systems. There is some evidence that progress is being made towards reducing indigenous commercial tobacco use, including the implementation of indigenous-focused initiatives. However, there are significant gaps and inconsistencies in reporting. Strengthening FCTC reporting instruments to include standardised indigenous-specific data will help to realise the FCTC Guiding Principles by holding States Parties to account and building momentum for reducing the high prevalence of commercial tobacco use among indigenous peoples.

Knowledge translation (KT) is a critical component of any applied health research. Indigenous Peoples' health research and KT largely continues to be taught, developed, designed, regulated, and conducted in ways that do not prioritize local Indigenous Peoples' ways of sharing knowledges. This review was governed and informed by Indigenous health scholars, Knowledge Guardians, and Elders. Our systematic review focused on answering, what are the promising and wise practices for KT in the Indigenous health research field? Fifty-one documents were included after screening published literature from any country and grey literature from what is now known as Canada. This included contacting 73 government agencies at the federal, territorial, and provincial levels that may have funded Indigenous health research. Only studies that: a) focused on Indigenous Peoples' health and wellness; b) documented knowledge sharing activities and rationale; c) evaluated the knowledge sharing processes or outcomes; and d) printed in English were included and appraised using the Well Living House quality appraisal tool. The analysis was completed using an iterative and narrative synthesis approach. Our systematic review protocol has been published elsewhere. We highlight and summarize the varied aims of Indigenous health research KT, types of KT methodologies and methods used, effectiveness of KT efforts, impacts of KT on Indigenous Peoples' health and wellness, as well as recommendations and lessons learned. Few authors reported using rigorous KT evaluation or disclosed their identity and relationship with the Indigenous communities involved in research (i.e. self-locate). The findings from this review accentuate, reiterate and reinforce that KT is inherent in Indigenous health research processes and content, as a form of knowing and doing. Indigenous health research must include inherent KT processes, if the research is by, for, and/or with Indigenous Peoples.

Effective knowledge translation (KT) is critical to implementing program and policy changes that require shared understandings of knowledge systems, assumptions, and practices. Within mainstream research institutions and funding agencies, systemic and insidious inequities, privileges, and power relationships inhibit Indigenous peoples’ control, input, and benefits over research. This systematic review will examine literature on KT initiatives in Indigenous health research to help identify wise and promising Indigenous KT practices and language in Canada and abroad. Indexed databases including Aboriginal Health Abstract Database, Bibliography of Native North Americans, CINAHL, Circumpolar Health Bibliographic Database, Dissertation Abstracts, First Nations Periodical Index, Medline, National Indigenous Studies Portal, ProQuest Conference Papers Index, PsycInfo, Social Services Abstracts, Social Work Abstracts, and Web of Science will be searched. A comprehensive list of non-indexed and grey literature sources will also be searched. For inclusion, documents must be published in English; linked to Indigenous health and wellbeing; focused on Indigenous people; document KT goals, activities, and rationale; and include an evaluation of their KT strategy. Identified quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods’ studies that meet the inclusion criteria will then be appraised using a quality appraisal tool for research with Indigenous people. Studies that score 6 or higher on the quality appraisal tool will be included for analysis. This unique systematic review involves robust Indigenous community engagement strategies throughout the life of the project, starting with the development of the review protocol. The review is being guided by senior Indigenous researchers who will purposefully include literature sources characterized by Indigenous authorship, community engagement, and representation; screen and appraise sources that meet Indigenous health research principles; and discuss the project with the Indigenous Elders to further explore the hazards, wisdom, and processes of sharing knowledge in research contexts. The overall aim of this review is to provide the evidence and basis for recommendations on wise practices for KT terminology and research that improves Indigenous health and wellbeing and/or access to services, programs, or policies that will lead to improved health and wellbeing. PROSPERO CRD42016049787 .

Indigenous peoples represent a diversity of cultures, perspectives, languages, experiences, and protocols that bring tremendous vibrancy across Turtle Island, commonly known as North America. We acknowledge the diversity of practices among these peoples, especially in their relationship with tobacco. The colonization of Turtle Island, which escalated after Christopher Columbus accidentally came unto the lands of the Arawakan people of the Caribbean, not only altered—and continues to alter—the culture, language, and traditions of the original inhabitants of this land, but it also has modified how tobacco is discussed.¹ Colonization is the action(s) or process(es) of settling and establishing control over the respective Indigenous peoples of the land, in this case across Turtle Island. Colonization also determines whose values and knowledges are privileged. This commentary discusses the impact of colonization on tobacco, the introduction of commercial tobacco, the relationship between tobacco and Indigenous populations, as well as the harmful influence this exchange has on Indigenous health and well-being. Decolonizing tobacco seeks to actively reverse and remedy the colonization of tobacco, through direct action, listening, and privileging Indigenous voices and peoples. This is consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.