Building on a YMCA's health and physical activity promotion capacities: A case study of a researcher-organization partnership to optimize adolescent programming_

Building partnerships: A case study of physical activity researchers and practitioners collaborating to build evidence to inform the delivery of a workplace step count challenge

Background

Walking is an integral part of Scotland's National Physical Activity Strategy, and the charity Paths for All's Workplace Step Count Challenge is a flagship programme within this strategy to promote physical activity. Effectively promoting physical activity requires collaborative engagement between stakeholders. However, there is limited guidance on how to do this. The aim of this case study is to share an example of a partnership between Paths for All and researchers to inform the development and delivery of the Workplace Step Count Challenge.

Method

An overview of the partnership, example activities, reflections on opportunities and challenges, and suggestions for future partnership working are considered.

Results

The partnership has evolved and strengthened over time through building trust. Many of the research activities provide an evidence base for the intervention. This work is mutually beneficial providing support for the work of the organisation, and opportunities for researchers to undertake "real world" research, leading to formal outputs and funding. The "real world" nature is challenging to integrate the most robust research designs. Recommendations for developing future partnerships were identified.

Conclusion

Promoting physical activity effectively requires partnership working, and this paper provides insight into how such partnerships can work to inform future collaborations.

Development and validation of a measure of organizational capacity for implementing youth development programs

Accumulating evidence indicates that incorporating youth development (YD) principles, strategies, and supports into an organization promotes positive adult and youth outcomes. However, few validated measures assess this type of capacity. The YMCA commissioned a study to validate its Capacity Assessment for Youth Development Programming (Y-CAP), which examines the organizational infrastructure required to implement YD programs and processes in seven areas. Survey development was an iterative process informed by existing frameworks, instruments, and pilot testing of items. The Y-CAP was reviewed and revised three times prior to this study, with a final round of revisions made at the start of the validation phase as a result of thorough content, survey methodology, and psychometrics reviews. The revised Y-CAP was completed by 123 YMCA implementation teams. Rasch analyses were used to determine the extent to which validity evidence supports the use and interpretation of the Y-CAP scores. Convergent validity was assessed by comparing Y-CAP scales to the Algorhythm staff survey for youth-serving organizations, and focus groups informed the consequential validity of the Y-CAP. The results provide strong evidence for the reliability and validity of the Y-CAP, which can be used to guide continuous quality improvement initiatives that support capacity and functioning in youth-serving organizations and programs.

Towards an assessment for organizational participatory research health partnerships: A systematic mixed studies review with framework synthesis

Within the health sciences, organizational participatory research (OPR) is defined as a blend of research and action, in which academic researchers partner with health organization members. OPR is based on a sound partnership between all stakeholders to improve organizational practices. However, little research on the evaluation of OPR health partnership exists. This systematic mixed studies review sought to produce a new theoretical model that structures the evaluation of the OPR processes and related outcomes of OPR health partnerships. Six bibliographic databases were searched together with grey literature sources for OPR health partnership evaluation questionnaires. Six questionnaires were included, from which a pool of 95 OPR health partnership evaluation items were derived. The included questionnaires were appraised for the quality of their origin, development and measurement properties. A framework synthesis was performed using an existing OPR framework by organizing questionnaire items in a matrix using a hybrid thematic analysis. This led to our proposed Organizational Participatory Research Evaluation Model (OPREM) that includes three axes, Trust, Collective Learning and Sustainability (with specific dimensions) and 95 items. This model provides information to help stakeholders comprehensively structure the evaluation of their partnerships and subsequent improvement; thus, potentially helping to improve health organization practices.

Engaging with communities, engaging with patients: amendment to the NAPCRG 1998 Policy Statement on Responsible Research With Communities

BACKGROUND

In 1998, the North American Primary Care Research Group (NAPCRG) adopted a groundbreaking Policy Statement endorsing responsible participatory research (PR) with communities. Since that time, PR gained prominence in primary care research.

OBJECTIVES

To reconsider the original 1998 Policy Statement in light of increased uptake of PR, and suggest future directions and applications for PR in primary care. This work contributed to an updated Policy Statement endorsed by NAPCRG in 2015.

METHODS

32 university and 30 community NAPCRG-affiliated research partners, convened a workshop to document lessons learned about implementing processes and principles of PR. This document emerged from that session and reflection and discussion regarding the original Policy Statement, the emerging PR literature, and our own experiences.

RESULTS

The foundational principles articulated in the 1998 Policy Statement remain relevant to the current PR environment. Lessons learned since its publication include that the maturation of partnerships is facilitated by participatory processes that support increased community responsibility for research projects, and benefits generated through PR extend beyond research outcomes. Future directions that will move forward the field of PR in primary care include: (i) improve assessment of PR processes to better delineate the links between how PR teams work together and diverse PR outcomes, (ii) increase the number of models incorporating PR into translational research from project inception to dissemination, and (iii) increase application of PR approaches that support patient engagement in clinical settings to patient-provider relationship and practice change research.

CONCLUSION

PR has markedly altered the manner in which primary care research is undertaken in partnership with communities and its principles and philosophies continue to offer means to assure that research results and processes improve the health of all communities.