QAT Tool - Harfield, S., Pearson, O., Morey, K., Kite, E., Canuto, K., Glover, K., Gomersall, J. S., Carter, D., Davy, C., Aromataris, E., & Braunack-Mayer, A. (2020). Assessing the quality of health research from an Indigenous perspective: the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander quality appraisal tool . BMC medical research methodology, 20(1), 79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-00959-3

Foundational article introducing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool (QAT), a 14-item framework developed to assess the quality of health research through an Indigenous lens. Designed in consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander experts, the tool emphasizes community engagement, Indigenous governance, cultural and intellectual property rights, and strength-based approaches. Validated through multiple rounds of piloting, the QAT fills a critical gap by offering a culturally grounded alternative to conventional appraisal tools, aiming to improve the transparency, relevance, and ethical rigour of research involving Indigenous Peoples.

📌Featured Publication - Wessel, S., Williams, K., Gray, M., Bagshaw, S. M., Bowker, S. L., Elliott, S. A., Ferrow, L., Henderson, R. I., Loewen, K., McNeil, D. A., Volk, A., Walker, J., & Oster, R. T. (2025). Exploring the use of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander quality appraisal tool in Indigenous health research. BMC medical research methodology, 25(1), 94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11987300/

Examines the use of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander QAT by four Canadian research teams to assess Indigenous engagement in health research. The teams applied the tool retrospectively in systematic and scoping reviews on various Indigenous health topics, finding it useful but also encountering challenges due to inconsistent reporting in academic literature, subjective interpretation of certain items, and the tool’s limitations in capturing Indigenous relational worldviews.

Key recommendations include engaging Indigenous partners early, clearly defining criteria, using multiple raters for consistency, and considering the QAT during research design to foster more equitable and community-driven research. The authors conclude that while the QAT offers valuable guidance, its application must be contextually adapted to local Indigenous communities.

Response Article - Harfield, S., Pearson, O., Morey, K., Glover, K., & Canuto, K. (2025). Review of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool in Indigenous settings outside of Australia. BMC medical research methodology, 25(1), 93. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02538-w

Response to Wessel et al.’s study on using the QAT in Canadian Indigenous health research; the original QAT authors commend Wessel et al. for applying the tool in a non-Australian context and reflect on the insights and recommendations offered in that work. They acknowledge the tool’s limitations, including its lack of explicit criteria around positionality, relationality, and reciprocity—concepts that are increasingly emphasized in Indigenous health research. The response reinforces the importance of adapting the QAT to local Indigenous contexts and supports Wessel et al.'s call for more nuanced and context-sensitive application. The authors express enthusiasm for ongoing dialogue and international collaboration to refine the QAT and enhance its relevance, usability, and cultural alignment in diverse Indigenous settings.