scholarly journals 3573 Critical Barriers to Effective Community-Academic Research Partnerships and Potential Solutions

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 86-87
Author(s):  
Susan J Woolford ◽  
Ayse G. Buyuktur ◽  
Patricia Piechowski ◽  
Aalap Doshi ◽  
Erica E. Marsh
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
The State ◽  
Academic Institutions ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Partnership Development ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Academic Partnerships ◽  
Effective Community

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Background: The importance of engaging community in research and fostering community-academic research partnerships is increasingly acknowledged by Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutes. However, forming and maintaining such collaborations is often hampered by numerous challenges. It is critical to investigate the barriers to effective community-academic partnerships and to develop novel approaches to overcome these barriers. Objective: To explore community and academic perspectives of the challenges faced by community-academic research partnerships and potential solutions to these identified challenges. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Methods: In an effort to explore creative approaches to address these issues, the Community Engagement Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR), the CTSA site that serves Michigan, hosted a retreat to elicit the input of community members and academics from across the state. There was a mix of participants ranging from those with established community-academic partnerships to others who were new to community-engaged research and in early stages of forming partnerships. At the retreat, attendees were randomly divided into groups and asked to answer the specific question, “What are your barriers to partnering in research?” After each group identified a set of barriers and reported their findings to the entire room, attendees were asked to work again in their small groups to discuss potential solutions to these barriers. Ideas for solutions were also shared with the entire room. As part of the process of brainstorming about these questions, attendees were asked to document their ideas --- for both barriers and solutions --- on post-it notes which were then grouped by category. Artifacts from the retreat were saved digitally and transcripts made from these records. The findings were then analyzed to identify common themes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Results: Eighty-six participants attended the retreat from across the state of Michigan. Forty-three represented community organizations that focus on addressing a wide array of social determinants of health issues. The remaining forty-three participants represented various academic institutions. The most frequently mentioned challenges to community-academic partnerships were related to communication and relationship building. To overcome barriers in these areas, participants noted that it is critical to collaboratively and explicitly identify shared goals, values and norms in the early stages of partnership development. This was closely linked to the need for additional funding to help foster and strengthen relationships by allowing partners to spend time together to both work and socialize informally, preferably in face-to-face settings. These were deemed crucial for building trust and common ground. In addition, more equitable funding and role distribution --- including shared leadership and governance of research projects between community and academia--- that recognizes and supports the true costs of involvement in research for community members was viewed as important. Other frequently noted issues on the part of community members were the need for greater respect for community partners and for more training opportunities to build capacity within communities to participate in research. Participants from academic institutions emphasized that the current requirements and timeline for promotion in academia make it harder for them to participate in community-engaged research, especially as early career researchers. They maintained that wider recognition of the value of community-engaged research is necessary and that this requires the support of home departments. Finally, participants underscored the importance of building infrastructure to better connect potential partners from the community and academia by making it easier to identify common interests and reciprocal strengths. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Conclusion: The problems faced by community-academic partnerships may be alleviated by working with community and academic members to identify potential solutions. Further work is needed to systematically examine barriers and the efficacy of solutions to enhance community-academic partnerships. Acknowledgements: We thank all attendees of the MICHR Community Engagement retreat for their participation in this activity that explored barriers to effective community-academic partnerships. Their honest and frank feedback was essential to broaching sensitive topics related to partnership development, and to identify realistic and practical solutions. We also thank all members of the planning committee and our colleagues in the Community Engagement Program for their work on bringing together community and academic members for this retreat. This project was supported by grant number UL1TR002240 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS).

Mural Painting to Collect Sensitizing Data and Encourage Research Participation Among U.S. Latinos

2021 ◽  
pp. 152483992110389
Author(s):  
Adrienne Martinez-Hollingsworth ◽  
Jacqueline Hernández ◽  
Cristina Edwards ◽  
Keosha Partlow
Keyword(s):  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Participation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Mural Painting ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Traditional Art ◽  
Implementation Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Approach

Purpose To describe a mural-based intervention that can be implemented in partnership with community members in Latino neighborhoods in order to improve awareness of barriers to recruitment/retention of U.S. Latinos in clinical research, while augmenting researchers’ access to sensitizing concepts critical for rigorous study design. Background Latinos in the United States suffer disproportionately from several chronic illnesses but are underrepresented as researchers and participants in National Institutes of Health–funded research. This lack of representation inhibits a nuanced awareness of the health needs of U.S. Latinos and hampers efforts to address a persistent lack of health equity among U.S. Latinos and other communities of color. Art-based interventions implemented in Latino communities are increasingly being recognized for their ability to bridge this gap and positively affect the quality and quantity of research partnerships between clinical researchers and U.S. Latinos. Method This article describes a mural-based intervention piloted in two predominantly Latino neighborhoods between 2016 and 2020. The design of this method was guided by community partnered participatory research practices and involved an Assessment–Diagnosis–Planning–Implementation–Evaluation approach. Results Mural painting addressed many of the participation challenges often associated with underrepresentation of Latinos in academic research and allowed for sensitizing interviews with key community members surrounding topics of interest to the research team. Conclusion Research methods that acknowledge traditional art forms, such as mural painting, create a space for building trust and spark interest in future research participation, while augmenting researchers’ access to sensitizing concepts that may improve the cultural competence of future studies, projects, and interventions.

scholarly journals Trust in Community-Engaged Research Partnerships: A Methodological Overview of Designing a Multisite Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Initiative

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-192
Author(s):  
Mimi M. Kim ◽  
Ann Cheney ◽  
Anita Black ◽  
Roland J. Thorpe ◽  
Crystal Wiley Cene ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Concept Mapping ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Community Health Care ◽  
Minority Communities ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Stakeholder Groups

Community-engaged research (CEnR) builds on the strengths of the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) framework to address health in underserved and minority communities. There is a paucity of studies that identify the process from which trust develops in CEnR partnerships. This study responds to the need for empirical investigation of building and maintaining trust from a multistakeholder perspective. We conducted a multi-institutional pilot study using concept mapping with to better understand how trust, a critical outcome of CEnR partnerships, can act as “social capital.” Concept mapping was used to collect data from the three stakeholder groups: community, health-care, and academic research partners across three CTSAs. Concept mapping is a mixed-methods approach that allows participants to brainstorm and identify factors that contribute to a concept and describe ways in which those factors relate to each other. This study offers important insights on developing an initial set of trust measures that can be used across CTSAs to understand differences and similarities in conceptualization of trust among key stakeholder groups, track changes in public trust in research, identify both positive and negative aspects of trust, identify characteristics that maintain trust, and inform the direction for future research.

scholarly journals From community engagement, to community-engaged research, to broadly engaged team science

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry P. Selker ◽  
Consuelo H. Wilkins
Keyword(s):  
Translational Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Team Science ◽  
Community Members ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Foundational Principle ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
Participation In Research

A foundational principle and practice for translational research is active participation of a range of disciplines, referred to as “team science.” It is increasingly apparent that to be relevant and impactful, these teams must also include stakeholders outside the usual academic research community, such as patients, communities, and not-for- and for-profit organizations. To emphasize the need to link the practices of team science and of community-engaged research, we propose a framework that has community members and stakeholders as integral members of the research team, which we term, “broadly engaged team science.” Such transdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder teams will be best suited to pose translational research questions, conduct the research, and interpret and disseminate the results. We think this will generate important and impactful science, and will support the public’s regard for, and participation in, research.

scholarly journals The journey and destination need to be intentional: Perceptions of success in community-academic research partnerships

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Lindquist-Grantz ◽  
Lisa M Vaughn
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Concept Mapping ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Intermediate Outcomes ◽  
Holistic Understanding ◽  
The Impact

Research partnerships between community members and academics are dynamic microsystems that aim to increase community wellbeing within complex environments. Efforts to improve health and social outcomes in communities are challenging in their own right, but even the most experienced researchers or engaged community members can have difficulty navigating the collaborative terrain of community-academic research partnerships. Proponents of participatory research models that engage community members as co-researchers are still examining how the collaborative process interacts with, and impacts, both short- and long-term outcomes. As a result, there has been a call for additional studies that employ qualitative and quantitative methods to contribute to a holistic understanding of this approach to research. This pilot study utilized the participatory tenets of co-researcher models to explore how members of community-academic research partnerships think about partnership processes and outcomes, including how they delineate between the two. Web-based concept mapping methodology was combined with individual interviews in an innovative mixed methods research study to further the field’s understanding of how community and academic members define partnership success and evaluate the impact of their work. Our findings suggest that in the early stages of a partnership members rely on informal and intuitive evaluation of success based on how the partnership is functioning. These partnership processes, which serve as intermediate outcomes, largely influence member engagement in the work, but partnerships are ultimately deemed successful if intended community-based research outcomes are achieved.Keywords: community-academic research partnerships, participatory research, concept mapping methodology, mixed methods, partnership process, outcomes   

scholarly journals Leveraging community engaged research partnerships for crisis and emergency risk communication to vulnerable populations in the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark L. Wieland ◽  
Gladys B. Asiedu ◽  
Kiley Lantz ◽  
Adeline Abbenyi ◽  
Jane W. Njeru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Networks ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Vulnerable Populations ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Socioeconomic Impacts ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Communication Framework ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Bidirectional Communication

Abstract Community engagement is important for reaching vulnerable populations in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A risk communication framework was implemented by a community-engaged research (CEnR) partnership in Southeast Minnesota to address COVID-19 prevention, testing, and socioeconomic impacts. Bidirectional communication between Communication Leaders and community members within their social networks was used by the partnership to refine messages, leverage resources, and advise policy makers. Over 14 days, messages were delivered by 24 Communication Leaders in 6 languages across 9 electronic platforms to 9882 individuals within their networks. CEnR partnerships may effectively implement crisis and emergency risk communication to vulnerable populations in a pandemic.

scholarly journals The 2019 Isdell:Flowers Cross Border Malaria Initiative Round Table: community engagement in the context of malaria elimination

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Gordon ◽  
Rebecca J. Vander Meulen ◽  
Alysse Maglior
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Malaria Elimination ◽  
Round Table ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Border Malaria ◽  
Effective Community

AbstractGovernment officials, representatives from malaria endemic communities, and nonprofit, academic, and private sector partners convened at the 2019 Isdell:Flowers Cross Border Malaria Initiative Round Table in Livingstone, Zambia from February 28–March 1, 2019 to discuss the necessity of community engagement and the involvement of those directly affected by malaria in malaria elimination efforts. Participants shared practical examples and principles of successful community engagement over the course of the Round Table. Three core principles of effective community engagement emerged: (1) there is no “one size fits all” community engagement strategy, (2) community engagement must be a bidirectional activity, and (3) community members must be at the heart of malaria elimination efforts.

scholarly journals Developing an Infrastructure to Cultivate Equitable and Sustainable Community-Academic Research Partnerships: Meharry Community Engagement Core

2020 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 423-427
Author(s):  
Elizabeth C. Stewart ◽  
Jennifer Cunningham Erves ◽  
Margaret K. Hargreaves ◽  
Jillian M. Duke ◽  
Maureen Sanderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Sustainable Community

scholarly journals 3347 Developing Relevant Community Engagement Metrics to Evaluate Engagement Support and Outcomes

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 87-88
Author(s):  
Grisel M. Robles-Schrader ◽  
Keith A Herzog ◽  
Josefina Serrato
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Process Analysis ◽  
National Level ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Academic Partnerships

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The goals in this project were two-fold:. Develop metrics that assessed community engagement support the center provides, and. Systematically document the fluid and time-intensive nature of providing community engaged research support, as well as key outcomes. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The CCH utilized REDCap software in combination with Excel, to create and implement a data collection system to monitor and report on the full spectrum of engagement activities offered by the center. Center staff collaborated in identifying relevant metrics, developing the data collection instruments, and beta-testing instruments with real examples. This facilitated the integration of contextual factors (defined as factors such as the history, size, and diversity of the community, the organizational mission, the structure and size of the CE team, the number of years a university has been supporting community-engaged research work, etc.). Taking a collaborative approach in developing the center’s evaluation plan offered the added benefit of facilitating staff/faculty buy-in, building staff capacity, and engaging the team in understanding concepts related to performance measurement versus management. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Key benefits of these engagement tracking systems include: consolidating data into a central location, standardizing tracking processes and critical definitions, and supporting more automated reporting systems (e.g., dashboards) that facilitate quality improvement and highlight success stories. Data were compiled and reported via on-line dashboard (REDCap and Tableau) to help center leadership and staff analyze:. Quality improvement issues (How quickly are we responding to a request for support? Are we providing resources that meet the needs of community partners? Academics? Community-academic partnerships?);. Qualitative process analysis (In what research phase are we typically receiving requests for support (e.g. proposal development phase, implementation phase, etc.)? What types of projects are applying for seed grants? After the seed grant ends, are the community-academic partnerships continuing to partner on research activities?);. Outcomes (Are new partnerships stemming from our support? Are supported research projects leading to new policies, practices, programs?). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: There is a gap in the literature regarding meaningful, actionable, and feasible community engaged metrics that capture critical processes and outcomes. This project identified many more relevant metrics and demonstrates that it is worthwhile to take a collaborative, inclusive approach to identifying, tracking, and reporting on key process and outcome metrics in order to convey a more comprehensive picture of community engagement activities and to inform continuous improvement efforts. Community engagement centers across CTSIs offer a similar range of programs and services. At the same time, much of the community-engaged research literature describes metrics related to community-academic grant submissions, funds awarded, and peer-reviewed publications. Experts that work in the arena of providing community engagement support recognize that these metrics are sufficient in understanding the spectrum of engagement opportunities. Community engagement (CE) teams nationally can utilize these metrics in developing their evaluation infrastructure. At the national level, NCATS can utilize the metrics for CE common metrics related to these programs and services. Critical to this process:. Leveraging resources that will facilitate collecting generalizable data (national metrics) while allowing sites to continue collecting nuanced data (local programs and services). Gathering input from CE teams, stakeholders, and researchers to further refine these metrics and data collection methods. Utilizing REDCap, Tableau and other resources that can facilitate data collection and analysis efforts.

scholarly journals 3406 Understanding the Barriers, Challenges, and Facilitators to Community-Engaged Research: A Review of a CTSA Community Engagement Pilot Program

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 99-100
Author(s):  
Ashley Dunn ◽  
Kendra L. Smith ◽  
Rhonda McClinton-Brown ◽  
Jill W. Evans ◽  
Lisa Goldman-Rosas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Disparities ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Translational Research ◽  
Pilot Project ◽  
Pilot Program ◽  
Stanford University ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Academic Partnerships ◽  
Clinical And Translational Research

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Engaging patients and consumers in research is a complex process where innovative strategies are needed to effectively translate scientific discoveries into improvements in the public’s health (Wilkins et. al., 2013; Terry et. al., 2013). The Clinical Translational Science Awards (CTSA)—supported by the National Institute of Health (NIH) under the auspices of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)—aim to provide resources and support needed to strengthen our nation’s clinical and translational research (CTR) enterprise. In 2008, Stanford University was awarded a CTSA from the NIH, establishing Spectrum (Stanford Center for Clinical and Translational Research and Education) and its Community Engagement (CE) Program aimed at building long-standing community-academic research partnerships for translational research in the local area surrounding Stanford University. To date, the CE Pilot Program has funded 38 pilot projects from the 2009-2017 calendar year. The purpose of this study was to understand, through a unique pilot program, the barriers, challenges, and facilitators to community-engaged research targeting health disparities as well as community-academic partnerships. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Investigators conducted a qualitative study of the community engagement pilot program. Previous pilot awardees were recruited via email and phone to participate in a one-hour focus group to discuss their pilot project experience—describing any barriers, challenges, and facilitators to implementing their pilot project. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The focus group revealed that community engage research through the pilot program was not only appreciated by faculty, but projects were successful, and partnerships developed were sustained after funding. Specifically, the pilot program has seen success in both traditional and capacity building metrics: the initial investment of $652,250.00 to fund 38 projects has led to over $11 million dollars in additional grant funding. In addition, pilot funding has led to peer-reviewed publications, data resources for theses and dissertations, local and national presentations/news articles, programmatic innovation, and community-level impact. Challenges and barriers were mainly related to timing, grant constraints, and university administrative processes. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The Community Engagement Pilot Program demonstrates an innovative collaborative approach to support community-academic partnerships. This assessment highlights the value and importance of pilot program to increase community engaged research targeting health disparities. Challenges are mainly administrative in nature: pilot awardees mentioned difficulties working on university quarterly timelines, challenges of subcontracting or sharing money with community partners, onerous NIH prior approval process, and limitations to carryover funding. However, pilot grants administered through the program strengthen the capacity to develop larger scale community-based research initiatives.

scholarly journals Identifying the Community-Engaged Translational Research Collaboration Experience and Health Interests of Community-Based Organizations Outside of Metropolitan Atlanta

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Breanna Blaess Greteman ◽  
Latrice Rollins ◽  
Allisen Penn ◽  
Alison Berg ◽  
Eric Nehl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Professional Organization ◽  
Health Priorities ◽  
Gis Mapping ◽  
Research Experience ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Community Based Organizations

Abstract Rural health research has increased over the last two decades, but there are still unknowns regarding health priorities from the perspective of rural community-based representatives. The Georgia Clinical and Translational Science Alliance (CTSA), a collaboration between four research institutions, statewide, includes a Community Engagement (CE) Program facilitating community-academic research partnerships. This study aimed to assess the health priorities, research experience, and interests from community respondents outside of Metropolitan Atlanta through the Community Engagement Facilitation Survey (CEFS). CE Program members disseminated the 11-item survey statewide at community events and professional organization meetings. Descriptive statistics were analyzed, and GIS mapping was conducted. Four-hundred six (406) surveys were analyzed, representing 83.6% of rural Georgia counties. Most frequently identified health priorities and research interests were diabetes, cancer, high blood pressure, and mental health. Results will be used to support those within rural Georgia organizations seeking to forge community-academic partnerships to address health priorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document