↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
“You didn’t just consult community, you involved us”: transformation of a ‘top-down’ Aboriginal mental health project into a ‘bottom-up’ community-driven process
Published in
Australasian Psychiatry, November 2015
DOI 10.1177/1039856215614985
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Recently, there has been a consistent call for Indigenous health research to be community-driven. However, for a variety of reasons, many projects, such as the one featured here, start as 'top-down'. Using ten accepted principles for Aboriginal health research, the present article illustrates how a 'top-down' project can be transformed into a 'bottom-up' community-driven project. A table of examples is provided to show how the ten principles were translated into practice to create a bottom-up process. We suggest that key elements for creating a bottom-up process are iterative conversations and 'community involvement' that goes beyond notional engagement. A feature of community involvement is generating and sustaining ongoing conversations with multiple levels of community (organisations, health professionals, Elders, community members, project-specific groups) in a variety of different forums across the entire duration of a project. Local research teams, a commitment to building capacity in the local Indigenous workforce, and adequate timelines and funding are other factors that we hypothesise may contribute to successful outcomes. The article contributes to a much-needed evidence base demonstrating how appropriate structures and strategies may create bottom-up processes leading to successful outcomes.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 6 6%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 31 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 15%
Social Sciences 11 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Psychology 8 8%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 35 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,297,343
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Australasian Psychiatry
#954
of 1,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,036
of 285,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australasian Psychiatry
#26
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,428 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.