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 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 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.

Management Strategy for Distributing Questionnaires and Interview Guidelines in the Research Data Collection Process

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-111
Author(s):  
Po. Abas Sunarya ◽  
George Iwan Marantika ◽  
Adam Faturahman
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Focus Group Interviews ◽  
Good Management ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Data Collection Process ◽  
Group Interviews

Writing can mean lowering or describing graphic symbols that describe a languageunderstood by someone. For a researcher, management of research preparation is a veryimportant step because this step greatly determines the success or failure of all researchactivities. Before a person starts with research activities, he must make a written plan commonlyreferred to as the management of research data collection. In the process of collecting researchdata, of course we can do the management of questionnaires as well as the preparation ofinterview guidelines to disseminate and obtain accurate information. With the arrangement ofplanning and conducting interviews: the ethics of conducting interviews, the advantages anddisadvantages of interviews, the formulation of interview questions, the schedule of interviews,group and focus group interviews, interviews using recording devices, and interview bias.making a questionnaire must be designed with very good management by giving to theinformation needed, in accordance with the problem and all that does not cause problems at thestage of analysis and interpretation.

Life Cycle Development of Successful Women-owned Enterprises

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 142-152
Author(s):  
Mohammad Waliul Hasanat ◽  
Kamna Anum ◽  
Ashikul Hoque ◽  
Mahmud Hamid ◽  
Sandy Francis Peris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Data Collection Process ◽  
Theoretical Finding ◽  
Successful Women ◽  
Two Phases ◽  
Life Cycle Development

In developing countries, the role of women in the business sector is continuously improving. As a result, female enterprises have also been encouraged in Pakistan. This study is based on life cycle development phases from which women-owned enterprises have to go through in order to become successful. As a primary data source, face-to-face interviews with owners of successful women-owned enterprises were preferred. The data collection process was divided into two phases i.e. Phase-I and Phase-II. After data collection, qualitative analysis has been performed using NVIVO. Findings provide both generic and specific factors involved in life cycle development of women-owned enterprises. This study provides a detailed view of life cycle development model followed by successful women enterprises. The outcome of this research work is a theoretical finding which can be utilized by entrepreneurs owning small scale enterprises to improve their level of performance. Findings can also be helpful for potentially talented women interested in setting up their own business.

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement–NeuroPoint Alliance collaboration to decrease length of stay and readmission after lumbar spine fusion: using national registries to design quality improvement protocols

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 812-821
Author(s):  
Scott L. Zuckerman ◽  
Clinton J. Devin ◽  
Vincent Rossi ◽  
Silky Chotai ◽  
E. Hunter Dyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Discharge Planning ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Nonparametric Tests ◽  
Learning System ◽  
Design Quality ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
Healthcare Improvement ◽  
The Impact

OBJECTIVENational databases collect large amounts of clinical information, yet application of these data can be challenging. The authors present the NeuroPoint Alliance and Institute for Healthcare Improvement (NPA-IHI) program as a novel attempt to create a quality improvement (QI) tool informed through registry data to improve the quality of care delivered. Reducing the length of stay (LOS) and readmission after elective lumbar fusion was chosen as the pilot module.METHODSThe NPA-IHI program prospectively enrolled patients undergoing elective 1- to 3-level lumbar fusions across 8 institutions. A three-pronged approach was taken that included the following phases: 1) Research Phase, 2) Development Phase, and 3) Implementation Phase. Primary outcomes were LOS and readmission. From January to June 2017, a learning system was created utilizing monthly conference calls, weekly data submission, and continuous refinement of the proposed QI tool. Nonparametric tests were used to assess the impact of the QI intervention.RESULTSThe novel QI tool included the following three areas of intervention: 1) preoperative discharge assessment (location, date, and instructions), 2) inpatient changes (LOS rounding checklist, daily huddle, and pain assessments), and 3) postdischarge calls (pain, primary care follow-up, and satisfaction). A total of 209 patients were enrolled, and the most common procedure was a posterior laminectomy/fusion (60.2%). Seven patients (3.3%) were readmitted during the study period. Preoperative discharge planning was completed for 129 patients (61.7%). A shorter median LOS was seen in those with a known preoperative discharge date (67 vs 80 hours, p = 0.018) and clear discharge instructions (71 vs 81 hours, p = 0.030). Patients with a known preoperative discharge plan also reported significantly increased satisfaction (8.0 vs 7.0, p = 0.028), and patients with increased discharge readiness (scale 0–10) also reported higher satisfaction (r = 0.474, p < 0.001). Those receiving postdischarge calls (76%) had a significantly shorter LOS than those without postdischarge calls (75 vs 99 hours, p = 0.020), although no significant relationship was seen between postdischarge calls and readmission (p = 0.342).CONCLUSIONSThe NPA-IHI program showed that preoperative discharge planning and postdischarge calls have the potential to reduce LOS and improve satisfaction after elective lumbar fusion. It is our hope that neurosurgical providers can recognize how registries can be used to both develop and implement a QI tool and appreciate the importance of QI implementation as a separate process from data collection/analysis.

Improving medical student recruitment to neurosurgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 133 (3) ◽  
pp. 848-854 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Lubelski ◽  
Roy Xiao ◽  
Debraj Mukherjee ◽  
William W. Ashley ◽  
Timothy Witham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Student ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
National Level ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Student Recruitment ◽  
Research Opportunities ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Lecture Series ◽  
Mentorship Programs

OBJECTIVENeurosurgery seeks to attract the best and brightest medical students; however, there is often a lack of early exposure to the field, among other possible barriers. The authors sought to identify successful practices that can be implemented to improve medical student recruitment to neurosurgery.METHODSUnited States neurosurgery residency program directors were surveyed to determine the number of medical student rotators and medical students matching into a neurosurgery residency from their programs between 2010 and 2016. Program directors were asked about the ways their respective institutions integrated medical students into departmental clinical and research activities.RESULTSComplete responses were received from 30/110 institutions. Fifty-two percent of the institutions had neurosurgery didactic lectures for 1st- and 2nd-year medical students (MS1/2), and 87% had didactics for MS3/4. Seventy-seven percent of departments had a neurosurgery interest group, which was the most common method used to integrate medical students into the department. Other forms of outreach included formal mentorship programs (53%), lecture series (57%), and neurosurgery anatomy labs (40%). Seventy-three percent of programs provided research opportunities to medical students, and 57% indicated that the schools had a formal research requirement. On average, 3 medical students did a rotation in each neurosurgery department and 1 matched into neurosurgery each year. However, there was substantial variability among programs. Over the 2010–2016 period, the responding institutions matched as many as 4% of the graduating class into neurosurgery per year, whereas others matched 0%–1%. Departments that matched a greater (≥ 1% per year) number of medical students into neurosurgery were significantly more likely to have a neurosurgery interest group and formal research requirements. A greater percentage of high-matching programs had neurosurgery mentorship programs, lecture series, and cadaver training opportunities compared to the other institutions.CONCLUSIONSIn recent decades, the number of applicants to neurosurgery has decreased. A major deterrent may be the delayed exposure of medical students to neurosurgery. Institutions with early preclinical exposure, active neurosurgery interest groups, research opportunities, and strong mentorship recruit and match more students into neurosurgery. Implementing such initiatives on a national level may increase the number of highly qualified medical students pursuing neurosurgery.

scholarly journals What have we learned about COVID-19 volunteering in the UK? A rapid review of the literature

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanlan Mao ◽  
Maria Fernandes-Jesus ◽  
Evangelos Ntontis ◽  
John Drury
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Social Trust ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
National Level ◽  
Community Support ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Background Community engagement and volunteering are essential for the public response to COVID-19. Since March 2020 a large number of people in the UK have been regularly doing unpaid activities to benefit others besides their close relatives. Although most mutual aid groups emerged from local neighbourhoods and communities, official public institutions also fostered community volunteering, namely through the community champions scheme. By considering a broad definition of COVID-19 volunteering, this article describes a systematic review of the literature focused on one broad question: What have we learned about COVID-19 volunteering both at the UK national level and the more local community level? Methods A rapid review of the literature in peer-reviewed databases and grey literature was applied in our search, following the PRISMA principles. The search was conducted from 10 to 16 of October 2020, and sources were included on the basis of having been published between January and October 2020, focusing on COVID-19 and addressing community groups, volunteering groups, volunteers, or community champions in the UK. Results After initial screening, a total of 40 relevant sources were identified. From these, 27 were considered eligible. Findings suggest that food shopping and emotional support were the most common activities, but there were diverse models of organisation and coordination in COVID-19 volunteering. Additionally, community support groups seem to be adjusting their activities and scope of action to current needs and challenges. Volunteers were mostly women, middle-class, highly educated, and working-age people. Social networks and connections, local knowledge, and social trust were key dimensions associated with community organising and volunteering. Furthermore, despite the efforts of a few official public institutions and councils, there has been limited community engagement and collaboration with volunteering groups and other community-based organisations. Conclusions We identified important factors for fostering community engagement and COVID-19 volunteering as well as gaps in the current literature. We suggest that future research should be directed towards deepening knowledge on sustaining community engagement, collaboration and community participation over time, during and beyond this pandemic.

scholarly journals Changing relationships: how does patient involvement transform professional identity? An ethnographic study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e045520
Author(s):  
Marie-Pierre Codsi ◽  
Philippe Karazivan ◽  
Ghislaine Rouly ◽  
Marie Leclaire ◽  
Antoine Boivin
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Administrative Team ◽  
Nurse Clinician ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
Relational Framework

ObjectivesTo understand identity tensions experienced by health professionals when patient partners join a quality improvement committee.DesignQualitative ethnographic study based on participatory observation.SettingAn interdisciplinary quality improvement committee of a Canadian urban academic family medicine clinic with little previous experience in patient partnership.ParticipantsTwo patient partners, seven health professionals (two family physicians, two residents, one pharmacist, one nurse clinician and one nurse practitioner) and three members of the administrative team.Data collectionData collection included compiled participatory observations, logbook notes and semi-structured interviews, collected between the summer of 2017 to the summer of 2019.Data analysisGhadiri’s identity threats theoretical framework was used to analyse qualitative material and to develop conceptualising categories, using QDA Miner software (V.5.0).ResultsAll professionals with a clinical care role and patient partners (n=9) accepted to participate in the ethnographic study and semi-structured interviews (RR=100%). Transforming the ‘caregiver–patient’ relationship into a ‘colleague–colleague’ relationship generated identity upheavals among professionals. Identity tensions included competing ideals of the ‘good professional’, challenges to the impermeability of the patient and professional categories, the interweaving of symbols associated with one or the other of these identities, and the inner balance between the roles of caregiver and colleague.ConclusionThis research provides a new perspective on understanding how working in partnership with patients transform health professionals’ identity. When they are called to work with patients outside of a simple therapeutic relationship, health professionals may feel tensions between their identity as caregivers and their identity as colleague. This allows us to better understand some underlying tensions elicited by the arrival of different patient engagement initiatives (eg, professionals’ resistance to working with patients, patients’ status and remuneration, professionals’ concerns toward patient ‘representativeness’). Partnership with patients imply the construction of a new relational framework, flexible and dynamic, that takes into account this coexistence of identities.

scholarly journals Improving Specimen Labelling and Data Collection in Bio-science Research using Mobile and Web Applications

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Isaac Nyabisa Oteyo ◽  
Mary Esther Muyoka Toili
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Web Applications ◽  
Data Entry ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Quality Of Data ◽  
Data Entry Form ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Daunting Task

AbstractResearchers in bio-sciences are increasingly harnessing technology to improve processes that were traditionally pegged on pen-and-paper and highly manual. The pen-and-paper approach is used mainly to record and capture data from experiment sites. This method is typically slow and prone to errors. Also, bio-science research activities are often undertaken in remote and distributed locations. Timeliness and quality of data collected are essential. The manual method is slow to collect quality data and relay it in a timely manner. Capturing data manually and relaying it in real time is a daunting task. The data collected has to be associated to respective specimens (objects or plants). In this paper, we seek to improve specimen labelling and data collection guided by the following questions; (1) How can data collection in bio-science research be improved? (2) How can specimen labelling be improved in bio-science research activities? We present WebLog, an application that we prototyped to aid researchers generate specimen labels and collect data from experiment sites. We use the application to convert the object (specimen) identifiers into quick response (QR) codes and use them to label the specimens. Once a specimen label is successfully scanned, the application automatically invokes the data entry form. The collected data is immediately sent to the server in electronic form for analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document