This rapid review aims to identify how Indigenous research governance is conceptualised, implemented and documented within Australian Indigenous health research studies. We searched for peer-reviewed English-language articles in two databases and for web-based grey literature published from database inception to November 2021. Reference lists were searched to identify additional articles. Data relating to research governance were extracted and analysed thematically. A total of 1120 records were screened, and 27 articles were included. Most articles providing detailed description of Indigenous research governance activities were qualitative studies (n=15, 55.6%). Key themes included members are experts; respectful relationships; flexibility; and key logistic considerations (nuts 'n' bolts). Although Indigenous research governance is recognised as an essential part of ethical research, activities and contributions made by Indigenous reference group (IRG) members are underreported. This important work needs greater visibility in the published literature to share best practice in Indigenous research governance that foregrounds Indigenous expert knowledge, perspectives, and experiences. The study provides a synthesis of factors to consider when establishing and facilitating an IRG for research with Indigenous communities. This has implications for researchers who can adapt and apply the findings to their practice.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing have fostered physical, social, and emotional wellbeing for millenia, forming a foundation of strength and resilience. However, colonisation, systemic violence and discrimination—including the forced removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, which continues today—have disrupted this foundation, leading to compounding cycles of intergenerational and complex trauma. The enduring impact of intergenerational and complex trauma is exemplified in increasing proportions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children being removed from their families and involved in the child protection and youth justice system—which represents a national crisis. Despite this crisis, the national response remains insufficient. To address these urgent issues, over 200 predominantly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander stakeholders, participated in Gathering the Seeds Symposium, the inaugural meeting for the Replanting the Birthing Trees project held in Perth in April 2023. This meeting marked the beginning of a public dialogue aimed at Closing the Gap by advancing community-led strategies to break cycles of trauma and foster cycles of nurturing, recovery, and wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents and children across the first 2000 days. We outline critical shortcomings in the current child protection and youth justice systems, and the urgent need for child wellbeing reform. Importantly we highlight recommendations made in submissions in 2023 to two key Australian inquiries—the National Early Years Strategy and the Human Rights Commission inquiry into out of home care and youth justice systems. We argue that structural reforms and culturally safe and skillful care for parents experiencing trauma and violence is a serious gap, and a national priority. The first 2000 days represents a critical window of opportunity to transform cycles of trauma into cycles of healing. It is time to ‘replant the birthing trees’ and ensure that all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander babies and families can have the best possible start to life through comprehensive models of care grounded in recognition of the right to self-determination and culture.

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.

BACKGROUND Universities in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand are increasingly seeking to Indigenise and decolonise health professional curricula. These processes require more than the inclusion of discrete Indigenous content; they involve structural and pedagogical transformation that recognises Indigenous knowledge authority, leadership, governance, and relationships with community and Country. Although relevant scholarship and institutional guidance are growing, the approaches used across health disciplines have not been comprehensively mapped, particularly in relation to Indigenous governance, co-design, workforce development, and sustainable institutional change. OBJECTIVE This scoping review aims to identify and map approaches used to Indigenise and/or decolonise health curricula in universities in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. It will examine curriculum design, pedagogy and assessment; Indigenous governance, leadership and co-design; workforce development and cultural safety; and reported outcomes, enabling factors, barriers, and evidence gaps. METHODS The review will be conducted in accordance with Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and reported using the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. Eligibility will be structured using the Population, Concept, and Context framework. Searches will include MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, A+ Education, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and Informit, supplemented by structured grey literature, citation, and organisational website searches. Sources published in English from January 2000 to December 2025 will be considered. Two reviewers will independently screen records and chart data using Covidence, with disputes resolved by consensus or third-reviewer adjudication. Findings will be synthesised through qualitative descriptive synthesis using iterative coding. Indigenous governance, relational accountability, reflexivity, and Indigenous Data Sovereignty principles will guide decision-making and interpretation throughout the review. RESULTS Protocol development commenced in February 2026 alongside preliminary searching and consultation with an academic librarian. These preliminary searches informed the development of the search strategy and confirmed the feasibility of the review. The search strategy was refined and finalised in August 2026, and the protocol manuscript is planned for submission to JMIR Research Protocols in September 2026. Formal database searching will commence following protocol submission, with title and abstract screening expected to begin in October 2026. The scoping review is anticipated to be completed by February 2027, with submission of the completed review manuscript planned for March 2027. CONCLUSIONS This review will provide a systematic account of how Indigenous knowledges, leadership, governance, and pedagogies have informed health curriculum transformation in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. It is expected to support Indigenous-led, culturally safe, and sustainable curriculum reform and identify priorities for research, policy, and institutional action

Background/objectives: Hospital settings can be unsafe for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, creating healthcare access barriers and perpetuating cycles of inequity. Healthcare service providers play a critical role in improving health equity. The Healing the Past by Nurturing the Future project (HPNF) delivered a training programme that aimed to improve service providers’ awareness, skills, and confidence in providing culturally safe, trauma-informed care. Methods: A mixed-methods evaluation assessed the acceptability and changes in self-reported knowledge, attitudes and practice (KAP) of one-day, face-to-face training sessions delivered at a large tertiary hospital in regional Victoria, Australia, from November 2023 to December 2024. Self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and practices were measured on a five-point Likert scale pre-training, post-training, and three months post-training. Participant perspectives were collected through evaluation forms and analysed using an inductive framework approach. Results: A total of 547 service providers participated in one of 38 training sessions. Responses to a KAP survey designed for this study showed positive changes in self-reported knowledge, attitudes and practice immediately after training that remained after three months among the smaller number of people that completed the survey. Participants expressed a need and desire for the training. Many highlighted new learning relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, Australian history, colonisation, and the neurobiology of trauma. Conclusions: Aboriginal co-designed face-to-face culturally safe trauma-informed training is highly acceptable for service providers. The HPNF training was followed by positive changes in service providers’ self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and practices in working in a safe and sensitive manner with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Such training may contribute to changes in health service providers’ capability to provide culturally responsive and trauma informed care. This may reduce healthcare access barriers and contribute to closing the gap in health and wellbeing outcomes and improve health equity.