Community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships exist as complex, dynamic relationships that incorporate shared decision that supports trust development between communities and academics. ...Within CBPR, the interest in understanding the concept of trust has grown with the realization that, without trust, CBPR relationships fracture. A barrier to monitoring the trust health of a partnership is the lack of a shared operationalization of the concept, its antecedents, and measurement tools. To address these barriers, a six-category trust typology was created as a developmental theory of trust progress. To advance the theory, this article reports on the quantitative structural elements of the trust typology, identifies variability in trust correlates, and creates an empirical foundation for the trust types. Using Engage for Equity data, trust covariates included measures of synergy, CBPR principles, participation, and influence. Structural equation models were used to assess associations between trust types and the latent constructs measured by the items in each measure. The findings demonstrate that the six trust types generally operate on a continuum. Specifically, it does appear that trust deficit, role-based trust, functional trust, proxy trust, and reflective trust are on a single continuum from low to high. Scale scores for reflective trust and proxy trust were consistently and statistically significantly higher than those for functional trust, role-based, neutral, and trust deficit. These results support the construct validity of the trust typology as representing “higher levels” of trust phases. Due to the dynamic nature of partnerships, regular monitoring of partnership trust types can serve as a proxy for partnership functioning.
The professional role in ethical review of research in which boards review proposed research involving human beings continues to evolve. The scholarly literature on institutional review boards in ...academic centers of the United States, at which a majority of the community engaged and participatory research emanates and is reviewed, suggests the need to implement changes in board education, the infrastructure supporting review, and the accountability of review. The recommendations for change advanced in this perspective involve enhancing reviewer knowledge of local community contexts and developing an infrastructure that supports engagement in and dialogue among individuals involved in community-academic research to inform ethical review and the assessment of review outcomes. Additionally, recommendations regarding putting an institutional infrastructure in place are advanced in order to sustain community engaged and participatory research. The infrastructure can also support the collection and review of outcome data as the foundation of accountability. The recommendations outlined intend to improve clinical research ethics reviews of community-engaged and participatory research.
Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) is often used to address health inequities due to structural racism. However, much of the existing literature emphasizes relationships and synergy rather ...than structural components of CBPR. This study introduces and tests new theoretical mechanisms of the CBPR Conceptual Model to address this limitation.
Three-stage online cross-sectional survey administered from 2016 to 2018 with 165 community-engaged research projects identified through federal databases or training grants. Participants (N = 453) were principal investigators and project team members (both academic and community partners) who provided project-level details and perceived contexts, processes, and outcomes. Data were analyzed through structural equation modeling and fuzzy-set qualitative comparison analysis.
Commitment to Collective Empowerment was a key mediating variable between context and intervention activities. Synergy and Community Engagement in Research Actions were mediating variables between context/partnership process and outcomes. Collective Empowerment was most strongly aligned with Synergy, while higher levels of Structural Governance and lower levels of Relationships were most consistent with higher Community Engagement in Research Actions.
The CBPR Conceptual Model identifies key theoretical mechanisms for explaining health equity and health outcomes in community-academic partnerships. The scholarly literature's preoccupation with synergy and relationships overlooks two promising practices-Structural Governance and Collective Empowerment-that interact from contexts through mechanisms to influence outcomes. These results also expand expectations beyond a "one size fits all" for reliably producing positive outcomes.
ObjectiveTo learn how high performing primary care practices organized care for patients with diabetes during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic.Participants and methodsSemi-structured ...interviews were conducted between August 10 and December 10, 2020 with 16 leaders from 11 practices that had top quartile performance measures for diabetes outcomes pre-COVID. Each clinic had completed a similar interview and a survey about the existence of care management systems associated with quality outcomes before the pandemic. Transcript analysis utilized a theoretical thematic analysis at the semantic level.ResultsThe pandemic disrupted the primary care practices' operations and processes considered important for quality prior to the pandemic, particularly clinic reliance on proactive patient care. Safety concerns resulted from the shift to virtual visits, which produced documentation gaps and led practices to reorder their use of proactive patient care processes. Informal interactions with patients also declined. These practices' challenges were mitigated by technical, informational and operational help from the larger organizations of which they were a part. Care management processes had to accommodate both in-person and virtual visits.ConclusionThese high performing practices demonstrated an ability to adapt their use of proactive patient care processes in pursuing quality outcomes for patients with diabetes during the pandemic. Continued clinic transformation and improvements in quality within primary care depend on the ability to restructure the responsibilities of care team members and their interactions with patients.
The Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) initiative calls on academic health centers to engage communities around a clinical research relationship measured ultimately in terms of public ...health. Among a few initiatives involving university accountability for advancing public interests, a small CTSA workgroup devised a community engagement (CE) logic model that organizes common activities within a university-community infrastructure to facilitate CE in research. Whereas the model focuses on the range of institutional CE inputs, it purposefully does not include an approach for assessing how CE influences research implementation and outcomes. Rather, with communities and individuals beginning to transition into new research roles, this article emphasizes studying CE through specific relationship types and assessing how expanded research teams contribute to the full spectrum of translational science.The authors propose a typology consisting of three relationship types-engagement, collaboration, and shared leadership-to provide a foundation for investigating community-academic contributions to the new CTSA research paradigm. The typology shifts attention from specific community-academic activities and, instead, encourages analyses focused on measuring the strength of relationships through variables like synergy and trust. The collaborative study of CE relationships will inform an understanding of CTSA infrastructure development in support of translational research and its goal, which is expressed in the logic model: better science, better answers, better population health.
This report describes a Science Café innovation, using an interpreter to translate remarks and engage three underserved Minnesota communities. It also illustrates how translational research can ...emphasize community benefit by combining longer-term knowledge production goals with shorter-term goals such as developing materials that are responsive to community health literacy needs.
To learn how high performing primary care practices organized care for patients with diabetes during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted between ...August 10 and December 10, 2020 with 16 leaders from 11 practices that had top quartile performance measures for diabetes outcomes pre-COVID. Each clinic had completed a similar interview and a survey about the existence of care management systems associated with quality outcomes before the pandemic. Transcript analysis utilized a theoretical thematic analysis at the semantic level.
The pandemic disrupted the primary care practices' operations and processes considered important for quality prior to the pandemic, particularly clinic reliance on proactive patient care. Safety concerns resulted from the shift to virtual visits, which produced documentation gaps and led practices to reorder their use of proactive patient care processes. Informal interactions with patients also declined. These practices' challenges were mitigated by technical, informational and operational help from the larger organizations of which they were a part. Care management processes had to accommodate both in-person and virtual visits.
These high performing practices demonstrated an ability to adapt their use of proactive patient care processes in pursuing quality outcomes for patients with diabetes during the pandemic. Continued clinic transformation and improvements in quality within primary care depend on the ability to restructure the responsibilities of care team members and their interactions with patients.
Collaboration between academic researchers and community members, clinicians, and organizations is valued at all levels of the program development process in community-engaged health research (CEnR). ...This descriptive study examined a convenience sample of 30 projects addressing training in CEnR methods and strategies within the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) consortium. Projects were selected from among posters presented at an annual community engagement conference over a 3-year period. Study goals were to learn more about how community participation in the design process affected selection of training topics, how distinct community settings influenced the selection of training formats, and the role of evaluation in preparing training participants to pursue future health research programming. Results indicated (1) a modest increase in training topics that reflected community health priorities as a result of community (as well as academic) participation at the program design stage, (2) a wide range of community-based settings for CEnR training programs, and (3) the majority of respondents conducted evaluations, which led in turn to revisions in the curricula for future training sessions. Practice and research implications are that the collaboration displayed by academic community teams around CEnR training should be traced to see if this participatory practice transfers to the design of health promotion programs. Second, collaborative training design tenets, community formats and settings, and evaluation strategies should be disseminated throughout the CTSA network and beyond. Third, common evaluative metrics and indicators of success for CEnR training programs should be identified across CTSA institutions.
PDF
