A Review of Trends in Indigenous Australian Tobacco Research (From 2004 to 2013), its Associated Outputs and Evidence of Research Translation

Abstract

Introduction: Smoking prevalence among Indigenous Australians nationally (45%) is more than double that of other Australians but ranges up to 82% in remote communities, causing significant health disparities. This paper examines trends in peer-reviewed research outputs related to Indigenous Australian tobacco control over the past decade and describes their research translation potential and alignment with national and jurisdictional policy priorities.

Methods: Systematic searches of electronic databases were conducted: Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Systematic Reviews, PsychInfo, and Australian HealthInfoNET for English-language peer-reviewed publications (2004-2013) primarily focusing on Indigenous Australian tobacco use. Publications were categorized by types, topics, and geographic location. Following established procedures, "reviews" and "commentaries" were distinguished from "original research," the latter further classified as "measurement," "descriptive," or "intervention" studies. Research translation categories used were: "synthesis," "dissemination," "exchange," and "application."

Results: The majority of 78 publications meeting selection criteria focused on cessation treatment (28%), monitoring and prevalence (24%) and passive smoking (13%). "Original research" was mostly "descriptive/epidemiologic" (81%) with few "intervention" studies (9%). Many studies were in remote communities. Components of research translation were identified in 50% of the publications with little evidence of dissemination strategies.

Conclusion: Remote community populations are an area of great need. However, generally it is disappointing that since 2004, few intervention studies are available to guide efforts to reduce tobacco-related health disparities. Stronger and more immediate alignment of policy with research that contributes to the evidence-base is required together with more systematic use of research dissemination translation strategies to better match evidence with priorities which may develop rapidly over time.