↓ Skip to main content

“Makes you proud to be black eh?”: Reflections on meaningful Indigenous research participation

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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.
Title
“Makes you proud to be black eh?”: Reflections on meaningful Indigenous research participation
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1475-9276-11-40
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jenny Kelly, Sherry Saggers, Kylie Taylor, Glenn Pearce, Peter Massey, Jennifer Bull, Travis Odo, John Thomas, Rosita Billycan, Jenni Judd, Susan Reilly, Shayne Ahboo

Abstract

This article outlines the meaningful participation of eight Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community members employed as community researchers investigating the impact of pandemic influenza in rural and remote Indigenous communities in Australia. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participation is now a requirement of health research involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. There is a growing literature on the different approaches to such involvement. Fundamental to this literature is an acknowledgement that Indigenous communities are no longer prepared to be research objects for external, mostly non-Indigenous researchers, and demand a role in decisions about what is researched and how it will be researched. In this paper, we describe the protracted process for site identification and recruitment and training of community researchers. We focus on the backgrounds of the Indigenous researchers and their motivations for involvement, and the strengths and challenges posed by Indigenous people researching in their own communities. Throughout the paper our concern is to document how genuine participation and the building of research capacity can occur.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 84 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 27 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 18 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Psychology 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 31 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 10 November 2021.
All research outputs
#6,571,725
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,057
of 2,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,834
of 184,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#7
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
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 184,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.