Connecting Community to Research: A Training Program to Increase Community Engagement in Research

Integrating a Community Advisory Board Into a Pragmatic Trial of Mindfulness for Chronic Low Back Pain

Background

To improve the implementation of clinical trial interventions, there is a need to facilitate communication between key stakeholders and research teams. Community Advisory Boards (CAB) bring together a range of stakeholders not historically included in the research process to inform and work collaboratively with research teams.

Objective

To describe our procedures and processes for (1) integration of a CAB into a pragmatic clinical trial of a telehealth-delivered group mindfulness program for persons with chronic low back pain (cLBP) within primary care, and (2) for the rapid uptake and implementation of CAB recommendations.

Methods

The CAB we convened includes persons with cLBP who have undergone the mindfulness intervention, health care system leadership, advocacy groups, and mindfulness experts. The CAB members underwent a two hour initial training that introduced the research process and the CAB's role as research partners. The CAB met monthly for 1 hour. We used the Lighting Report method to summarize meetings and share feedback with the research team.

Results

The recommendations of the CAB during the first year they met were divided into recruitment, informed consent, and survey recommendations. The study website also was overhauled based on recommendations, including a more engaging first page with rotating images of nature and testimonials. The language on the website was edited to be more concise and participant-friendly. The CAB recommended talking points to discuss with participants during screening or informed consent about the benefits of participating in research.

Conclusion

We established a CAB that represented diverse perspectives, organizations, and experience with cLBP and mindfulness. The differing perspectives of the CAB resulted in recommendations that the research team itself would not have decided on their own. The Lightning Reports were also an effective way to efficiently communicate the CAB recommendations to the research team.

Increasing research capacity in community organizations: Findings from the Community Research Scholars Initiative

Increasing research capacity in community-based organizations (CBOs) can equip the organizations to be more equal partners in academic/community partnerships and can help them be more accountable to their clients and funders. In this study, we report on findings from four years of data collected from the Community Research Scholars Initiative (CRSI) in Cleveland, Ohio. CRSI provided intensive research training over two years to two cohorts (N = 9) of frontline workers ("Scholars") from CBOs focused on health disparities. Scholars completed one year of didactic training and one year of mentoring to complete a research project based at their organization. Findings from surveys, focus groups with Scholars, and supervisor interviews indicated changes in Scholars' knowledge, confidence, and comfort with research concepts and skills. Scholars also demonstrated greater confidence in interacting with academic researchers, enhanced networks and career opportunities, and increased capacity for conducting community-based research. Scholar and organization engagement with community-based research was maintained after the program's end through a community-based research network (CBRN). Findings suggest that the intensive training program for community members with a broad curriculum, mentoring, and strong support helped changed how CBOs think about data and research and demonstrate the impact of their work.

Training Indigenous Community Researchers for Community-Based Participatory Ethnographic Dementia Research: A Second-Generation Model

Conducting community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a complex endeavor, particularly when training non-academic community members. Though examples of CBPR training programs and protocols have been published, they often address a limited set of concepts and are tailored for university or medical school students. Here, we describe the process of developing an online CBPR training program for American Indian (United States) and Indigenous (Canada) community members to conduct multi-sited ethnographic dementia research. This program is unique in its breadth and depth, as our program covers CBPR theory, methods, practical research, and administrative skills. Significantly, this program centers Indigenous methodology, pedagogy, and processes such as two-eyed seeing, storywork, and decolonization approaches. Key to this training program is a "second-generation" approach which incorporates experiential knowledge from prior community-based researchers and academic partners and is designed to develop CBPR capacity among community-based researchers and partnering communities. In this paper, we detail the experience of the first cohort of learners and subsequent improvement of the training materials. Unique challenges related to the specific research focus (dementia care pathway), population/setting (American Indian and Indigenous communities), and technology (rural digital infrastructure) are also discussed.

Evaluation of parent and youth experiences in advisory groups as part of a mental healthcare clinical trial: protocol for a mixed-method study

INTRODUCTION

Patient engagement in healthcare research is a necessity to ensure that research objectives align with priorities, outcomes and needs of the population under study, and to facilitate ease of implementation and adoption of findings. In clinical trials, there is an increasing focus on patient engagement during the planning and conduct of clinical trials due to the potential for ethical and methodological benefits. As patient engagement in clinical trials increases, there is a need to evaluate the approaches of these activities to contribute evidence on what is most appropriate and successful. The purpose of this study is to evaluate patient engagement processes and the activities of patient partners during and after a paediatric mental healthcare trial.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Using a mixed-methods study design, we will evaluate patient partners' engagement activities across set time-points during the trial and after trial completion. In this study, the term 'patient partner' is inclusive of two groups of people with lived experience: (1) caregivers (parents, formal/informal caregivers and family), and (2) youth (aged 15-24 years). Engagement will be evaluated using the participant and project questionnaires of the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PPEET), followed sequentially by semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data from the PPEET questionnaire will be analysed and reported using descriptive statistics. Data from open-ended questions from the PPEET questionnaires and semi-structured interviews will be analysed using thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval from Athabasca University Research Ethics Board will be obtained for this project. Findings will be disseminated at both academic and public venues whether in-person or online, and using platforms that are caregiver and youth friendly.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04902391.

"It has to be designed in a way that really challenges people's assumptions": preparing scholars to build equitable community research partnerships

Introduction:

Clinical and Translational Award (CTSA) programs are developing relevant training for researchers and community stakeholders participating in community-engaged research (CEnR). However, there is limited research exploring the ways community stakeholders and partners with key CEnR experiences can inform and shape training priorities for prospective CEnR scholars to build meaningful and equitable partnerships.

Methods:

This study conducted and analyzed online individual semi-structured in-depth interviews with community stakeholders (n = 13) engaged in CEnR to identify training priorities for graduate students and emerging scholars.

Findings:

Thematic analysis of 13 interview transcripts revealed four major training priorities for prospective scholars interested in engaging in CEnR: 1) researcher’s positionality, 2) equitable power sharing, 3) funding, and 4) ethics.

Conclusion:

Building equitable research partnerships was a central theme woven across all four training priorities. Further research should focus on examining the development, implementation, and evaluation of CEnR training in partnership with community stakeholders and partners with relevant CEnR experience. Adopting a collaborative approach to incorporate both community stakeholders and researchers’ priorities can align training competencies to better prepare scholars to engage in building research partnerships.

Patient powered research: an approach to building capacity for a hardly reached patient population to engage in cancer research

BACKGROUND

Participating in clinical trials is a metric of high-quality cancer care and improves survival. However, Black individuals with cancer are less likely to be enrolled in clinical trials and experience a disproportionate burden of cancer mortality compared to Whites. Patient-engaged research is one potential strategy to address racial inequities in clinical trials, but little is known about best practices for engaging Black individuals and communities impacted by cancer in research partnerships.

METHODS

We used a community engaged research approach to establish a patient advisory council (PAC) representative of the patient population served by a safety net hospital cancer center. We outline the process of establishing the PAC and the lessons learned.

RESULTS

The inaugural PAC included 7 members representative of the cancer center's patient demographics. PAC members developed a patient centered vision, mission and action plan. PAC and community-academic research partners experienced the transformative power of centering the lived experiences of patients of color to promote health equity in cancer research.

CONCLUSION

Establishing a patient advisory council at a safety net hospital cancer care center provided a platform for engaging a hardly reached population in patient centered research.

Recognizing Cross-Institutional Fiscal and Administrative Barriers and Facilitators to Conducting Community-Engaged Clinical and Translational Research

PURPOSE

This qualitative study examined fiscal and administrative (i.e., pre- and post-award grants process) barriers and facilitators to community-engaged research among stakeholders across 4 Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) institutions.

METHOD

A purposive sample of 24 key informants from 3 stakeholder groups-community partners, academic researchers, and research administrators-from the CTSA institutions at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Medical University of South Carolina, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, and Yale University participated. Semistructured interviews were conducted in March-July 2018, including questions about perceived challenges and best practices in fiscal and administrative processes in community-engaged research. Transcribed interviews were independently reviewed and analyzed using the Rapid Assessment Process to facilitate key theme and quote identification.

RESULTS

Community partners were predominantly Black, academic researchers and research administrators were predominantly White, and women made up two-thirds of the overall sample. Five key themes were identified: level of partnership equity, partnership collaboration and communication, institutional policies and procedures, level of familiarity with varying fiscal and administrative processes, and financial management expectations. No stakeholders reported best practices for the institutional policies and procedures theme. Cross-cutting challenges included communication gaps between stakeholder groups; lack of or limits in supporting community partners' fiscal capacity; and lack of collective awareness of each stakeholder group's processes, procedures, and needs. Cross-cutting best practices centered on shared decision making and early and timely communication between all stakeholder groups in both pre- and post-award processes.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings highlight the importance of equitable processes, triangulated communication, transparency, and recognizing and respecting different financial management cultures within community-engaged research. This work can be a springboard used by CTSA institutions to build on available resources that facilitate co-learning and discussions between community partners, academic researchers, and research administrators on fiscal readiness and administrative processes for improved community-engaged research partnerships.

Community partnerships in emerging immigrant communities: Lessons learned addressing Latino childhood weight disparities

Latino children have disproportionately high childhood obesity rates, and U.S.-born Latino children of immigrant parents experience higher overweight/obesity rates than other Latino children. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) to engage Latino immigrant families and Latino-serving community organizations is one mechanism to address the lack of effective and practical interventions addressing childhood obesity disparities among Latino children. We present lessons learned from applying CBPR methods to a partnership focused on developing a child obesity treatment program for Latino immigrant families in an emerging Latino immigrant destination to inform the use of CBPR methods in other partnerships in emerging immigrant communities. We encountered challenges working within the partnership related to entrenched sociopolitical hierarchies that were not inclusive of immigrant community leaders, capacity building for partners with limited literacy and administrative experience, and how best to use complementary methods and frameworks to support a community-engaged research process. This work is one way to promote shared learning among the community of researchers using CBPR and other engagement methods to partner with emerging immigrant communities. Together with our community partners, we can identify strategies to more effectively partner to promote health equity and work toward social justice for all members of our communities.

Co-designing to advance community health and health equity in Wisconsin: Building the Neighborhood Health Partnerships Program

Engaging communities can increase the speed of translating health and health equity research into practice. Effective engagement requires a shared understanding of the health of a community. This can be challenging without timely and accurate local health data, or ways to provide that data, that are directly applicable to improving community health outcomes. The University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational Research formed the Neighborhood Health Partnerships Program (NHP) to overcome this challenge, making sub-county health data available to researchers and community stakeholders while incorporating community voice into data delivery processes. The NHP team used a human-centered design approach to facilitate community engagement. Through co-design, the team created NHP reports and data-to-action tools to maximize accessibility and utility for a diverse set of community stakeholders. Early indicators show that the final co-designed NHP reports and data-to-action tools will be immediately useful in promoting community–academic partnerships and in planning, implementing, and evaluating research and other initiatives in communities. The NHP program demonstrates that an effective co-design strategy can lead to increased usability and adoption of Clinical and Translational Science Award resources, enabling a shared understanding of community health and ultimately leading to the successful translation of research into practice.

Collaboration and Context in the Design of Community-Engaged Research Training

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.