scholarly journals Development of a self-directed, online-learning curriculum to increase community-engaged research in clinical and translational science

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce E. Balls-Berry ◽  
Heather Billings ◽  
Laura Ernste ◽  
Miguel Valdez Soto ◽  
Katrin Frimannsdottir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Online Learning ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Educational Needs ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Health Community ◽  
Improve Health

BackgroundMedical research strives to improve health; community-engaged research (CEnR) supports translation to the community.MethodsThis article describes the use of andragogical theory to develop asynchronous CEnR training.ResultsA total of 43 researchers and community members completed at least one module. The majority (67%–100%) stated that training met their educational needs and noted a desire for more information.ConclusionThe curriculum reinforced CEnR principles to enhance medical research.

scholarly journals Effectively Confronting the COVID-19 Pandemic: Critical Lessons From HIV Prevention, Care, and Treatment and Innovative Strategies to Conduct Community-Based and Community-Engaged Research Safely

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 455-471
Author(s):  
Scott D. Rhodes ◽  
Francisco S. Sy
Keyword(s):  
Hiv Prevention ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Research Implementation ◽  
Innovative Strategies ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Care And Treatment ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Improve Health

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a new infectious disease caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly altered the ways in which members of communities live, learn, work, and play. Similarly, the pandemic has affected the conduct of community-based and community-engaged research, which are essential research approaches to promoting health equity, reducing health disparities, and improving community and population health. In this commentary, we outline nine lessons from HIV prevention, care, and treatment that are particularly relevant to reducing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also identify ten innovative strategies to reduce exposure to SARS-CoV-2 among teams and community members conducting community-based and community-engaged research. Implementation of these strategies will help to ensure these research approaches can safely continue during the pandemic and that communities and populations continue to benefit from research designed to promote equity, reduce disparities, and improve health.

scholarly journals Community-Engaged Research in Translational Science: Innovations to Improve Health in Appalachia

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Scott D. Rhodes ◽  
Parissa J. Ballard ◽  
Keena R. Moore ◽  
Karen Klein ◽  
Isaiah Randall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Translational Science ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Improve Health

Common Enemies

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Kahn Best
Keyword(s):  
Medical Research ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Access To Healthcare ◽  
Health Policies ◽  
Awareness Campaigns ◽  
Comprehensive Data ◽  
Time Changes ◽  
Perception Of Health ◽  
Individual Disease ◽  
Improve Health

Americans come together to fight diseases. For over 100 years, they have asked their neighbors to contribute to disease campaigns and supported health policies that target one disease at a time. Common Enemies asks why disease campaigns are the battles Americans can agree to fight, why some diseases attract more attention than others, and how fighting one disease at a time changes how Americans distribute charitable dollars, prioritize policies, and promote health. Drawing on the first comprehensive data on thousands of organizations targeting hundreds of diseases over decades, the author shows that disease campaigns proliferate due to the perception of health as a universal goal, the appeal of narrowly targeted campaigns, and the strategic avoidance of controversy. They funnel vast sums of money and attention to a few favored diseases, and they prioritize awareness campaigns and medical research over preventing disease and ensuring access to healthcare. It’s easy to imagine more efficient ways to promote collective well-being. Yet the same forces that limit the potential of individual disease campaigns to improve health also stimulate the vast outpouring of money and attention. Rather than displacing attention to other problems, disease campaigns build up the capacity to address them.

scholarly journals Grappling With Complex Food Systems to Reduce Obesity: A US Public Health Challenge

2018 ◽  
Vol 133 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 44S-53S ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Barnhill ◽  
Anne Palmer ◽  
Christine M. Weston ◽  
Kelly D. Brownell ◽  
Kate Clancy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Food Systems ◽  
Food System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Health Community ◽  
Policies And Programs ◽  
State Programs

Despite 2 decades of effort by the public health community to combat obesity, obesity rates in the United States continue to rise. This lack of progress raises fundamental questions about the adequacy of our current approaches. Although the causes of population-wide obesity are multifactorial, attention to food systems as potential drivers of obesity has been prominent. However, the relationships between broader food systems and obesity are not always well understood. Our efforts to address obesity can be advanced and improved by the use of systems approaches that consider outcomes of the interconnected global food system, including undernutrition, climate change, the environmental sustainability of agriculture, and other social and economic concerns. By implementing innovative local and state programs, taking new approaches to overcome political obstacles to effect policy, and reconceptualizing research needs, we can improve obesity prevention efforts that target the food systems, maximize positive outcomes, and minimize adverse consequences. We recommend strengthening innovative local policies and programs, particularly those that involve community members in identifying problems and potential solutions and that embrace a broad set of goals beyond making eating patterns healthier. We also recommend undertaking interdisciplinary research projects that go beyond testing targeted interventions in specific populations and aim to build an understanding of the broader social, political, and economic context.

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 Embedding consumer and community involvement within an established research centre: moving from general recommendations to an actionable framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tilini Gunatillake ◽  
Cade Shadbolt ◽  
Daniel Gould ◽  
Michelle Lam ◽  
Marion Glanville Hearst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
National Health ◽  
Research Program ◽  
Community Involvement ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Medical Research Council ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Community Members

Plain English summary Involving consumers and community members in the research process is an important step towards developing and delivering effective, person-centered health care. The National Health and Medical Research Council have provided recommendations for involving consumers and community members in research; however, definitive actions to implement these are not well defined. To address this, an established research centre in Melbourne, Australia, has developed a consumer and community involvement framework to incorporate the national recommendations into their research program. This paper describes the framework the research centre has employed, in the hope that other researchers can adapt this approach and learnings to their own research practices. The framework described in this paper aims to foster partnerships between consumers, community members and researchers, and in doing so, encourages consumers to be actively involved in research to help improve future outcomes for those living with musculoskeletal conditions. Simultaneously, the framework encourages researchers to value the consumer voice in their research to ensure they yield meaningful research outcomes for those living with musculoskeletal conditions. Abstract Background The value of involving consumers and community members in every stage of the research process is gaining recognition as an important consideration in the wider research landscape. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) has provided general recommendations for involving consumers and community members in research, although the translation of these recommendations into tangible actions has not yet been well defined. In light of these recommendations, many research institutions are now seeking to incorporate the voices of consumers and community members in their research practices. Methods The consumer and community involvement framework described in this paper incorporates the NHMRC’s recommendations to produce a four-tiered model where consumer participants nominate their level of involvement depending on their research interests and preferred level of commitment. In ascending order, the tiers are: Consumer Subscriber, Document Reviewer, Research Buddy and Consumer Advocate. The success of this framework depends upon the implementation of effective governance and access to appropriate infrastructure. A Consumer and Community Advisory Group and a designated Consumer and Community Liaison Officer will take responsibility for ensuring appropriate interactions between consumers, researchers, and the research center’s executive team. The framework aims to apply suitable support structures in place to manage expectations and minimize barriers to effective involvement, whilst ensuring that consumer contributions are appropriately valued and incorporated in the research. Discussion Involving consumers and community members in the research process is an important step towards developing and delivering effective, person-centered health care. While consumer and community involvement offer researchers invaluable perspectives on their research program, it provides an opportunity for consumers and community members to be actively involved in health research and improve the health and wellbeing for those living with health conditions.

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 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).

scholarly journals 3564 Breaking the Mold: Using a learner & faculty centric approach to increase satisfaction and usability

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 63-63
Author(s):  
Katherine Cornelius ◽  
Alexandra Joelle Greenberg-Worisek ◽  
Ryan Jimison ◽  
Jennifer Weisbrod ◽  
Karen Marie Weavers
Keyword(s):  
Online Learning ◽  
Graduate School ◽  
Multidisciplinary Team ◽  
Faculty Satisfaction ◽  
Course Satisfaction ◽  
Biomedical Science ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Learning Space ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Scholars and faculty in the Clinical and Translational Science (CTS) track of our institution’s biomedical science graduate school reported a lack of satisfaction with our learning management system (LMS); specifically, they reported frustration with the amount of time spent locating learning assignment guidelines, course readings, and submission portals. As a result, we created a new master template to address their concerns. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A new template was created within the LMS based on scholar and faculty feedback. Surveys and other tools have been used to determine student and faculty satisfaction as well as measure secondary outcomes of time spent in the online learning space. Some key changes include a redesigned menu and submission portal. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: There was an increase in satisfaction with the new LMS template. Next steps include systematically rolling out the new template, with continued solicitation of feedback from all stakeholders. All courses in the CTS track will be converted to the new template by summer quarter 2020. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The strengths of this project include the multidisciplinary team-based approach to improving course satisfaction and usability, as well as the use of innovative technologies. Additionally, the analytical capabilities of the LMS will be maximized in the new template, which was a shortcoming of the previously available template.

scholarly journals Exploring the potential role of community engagement in evaluating clinical and translational science grant proposals

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey W. Treem ◽  
Margaret Schneider ◽  
Robynn L. Zender ◽  
Dara H. Sorkin
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Stage Process ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
The University

IntroductionThis study explored the effects of integrating community members into the evaluation of clinical and translational science grants.MethodsThe University of California, Irvine Institute for Clinical and Translational Sciences (ICTS) engaged 21 community reviewers alongside scientific reviewers in a 2-stage process of evaluating research proposals. In Stage 1 reviewers scored proposals, and during Stage 2 two study sections convened: one a mix of community reviewers and scientific reviewers, and one only engaging scientific reviewers. In total, 4 studies were discussed by both study sections.ResultsComparisons of reviews revealed little difference between ratings of community reviewers and those of scientific reviewers, and that community reviewers largely refrained from critiquing scientific or technical aspects of proposals.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that involving community reviewers early in the grant cycle, and exposing them to the entirety of the review process, can bolster community engagement without compromising the rigor of grant evaluations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document