Dataset Information

Public-academic partnerships: evidence-based implementation: the role of sustained community-based practice and research partnerships.

ABSTRACT: This column describes a process for adapting an evidence-based practice in community clinics in which researchers and community providers participated and the resulting framework for implementation of the practice-Replicating Effective Programs-Facilitation. A two-day meeting for the Recovery-Oriented Collaborative Care study was conducted to elicit input from more than 50 stakeholders, including community providers, health care administrators, and implementation researchers. The process illustrates an effective researcher-community partnership in which stakeholders worked together not only to adapt the evidence-based practice to the needs of the clinical settings but also to develop the implementation strategy.

SUBMITTER: Kilbourne AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5721667 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Public-academic partnerships: evidence-based implementation: the role of sustained community-based practice and research partnerships.

Kilbourne Amy M AM Neumann Mary Spink MS Waxmonsky Jeanette J Bauer Mark S MS Kim Hyungin Myra HM Pincus Harold Alan HA Thomas Marshall M

Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 20120301 3

This column describes a process for adapting an evidence-based practice in community clinics in which researchers and community providers participated and the resulting framework for implementation of the practice-Replicating Effective Programs-Facilitation. A two-day meeting for the Recovery-Oriented Collaborative Care study was conducted to elicit input from more than 50 stakeholders, including community providers, health care administrators, and implementation researchers. The process illustr ...[more]

PMID: 22388527

Similar Datasets

Project description:Community involvement in HIV research has increased over recent years, enhancing community-academic partnerships. Several terms have been used to describe community participation in research. Clarification is needed to determine whether these terms are synonymous or actually describe different research processes. In addition, it remains unclear if the role that communities play in the actual research process follows the recommendations given in theoretical frameworks of community-academia research.The objective of this study is to review the existing terms and definitions regarding community-academic partnerships and assess how studies are implementing these in relation to conceptual definitions.A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed. Two reviewers independently assessed each article, applying the following inclusion criteria: the article must be published in English before 2013; it must provide an explicit definition and/or defining methodology for a term describing research with a community component; and it has to refer to HIV or AIDS, reproductive health and/or STDs. When disagreements about the relevance of an article emerged, a third reviewer was involved until concordance was reached. Data were extracted by one reviewer and independently verified by a second. Qualitative data were analyzed using MaxQDA for content and thematic analyses while quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Community feedback on data analysis and presentation of results was also incorporated.In total, 246 articles were retrieved, 159 of which fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The number of studies that included community participation in the field of HIV research increased between 1991 and 2012, and the terms used to describe these activities have changed, moving away from action research (AR) to participatory action research (PAR), community-based research (CBR) and community-based participatory research (CBPR), with the latter being the most commonly used term. While definitions of all terms had common characteristics (e.g. participation of community in research process), they varied with regard to the emphasis placed on these characteristics. The nature of community participation in reviewed studies differed considerably from that described in theoretical models.This study indicates the increase of participatory approaches in HIV research and underlines the need for clarification of terms and a framework providing orientation to community-academia partnerships.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Previous research has reported that public-academic partnerships (PAPs) can effectively promote PAP leaders' use of research evidence in improving youth outcomes. However, the existing literature has not yet clarified whether and how PAP leaders' use of research evidence evolves along the PAP life cycle and whether PAP partners' concordant perceptions of usefulness of their PAP has an impact on PAP leaders' use of research evidence. Developing a conceptual framework that recognizes the PAP life cycle and empirically identifying contexts and mechanisms of PAPs that promote PAP leaders' use of research evidence from the PAP life cycle perspective are imperative to guide researchers and policymakers to successfully lead PAPs and foster policymakers' use of research evidence for improving youth outcomes. OBJECTIVE:Utilizing an integrated framework of organizational life cycle perspective, a social partnership perspective, and a realist evaluation, this study examines the extent to which PAP development and PAP leaders' use of research evidence can be characterized into life cycle stages and identifies PAP contexts and mechanisms that explain the progress of PAPs and PAP leaders' use of research evidence through life cycle stages. METHODS:Recruiting PAPs across the United States that aim to improve mental health and promote well-being of youth aged 12-25 years, the study conducts a document analysis and an online survey of PAPs to inform policymakers and academic researchers on the contexts and mechanisms to increase PAP sustainability and promote policymakers' use of research evidence in improving youth outcomes. RESULTS:Fifty-three PAPs that meet the recruitment criteria have been identified, and document review of PAPs and participant recruitment for the online survey of PAP experience have been conducted. CONCLUSIONS:This paper will help policymakers and researchers gain a deeper knowledge of the contexts and mechanisms for each PAP life cycle stage in order to optimize PAP leaders' use of research evidence in achieving positive youth outcomes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):DERR1-10.2196/14382.

Dataset Information

Public-academic partnerships: evidence-based implementation: the role of sustained community-based practice and research partnerships.

Publications

Public-academic partnerships: evidence-based implementation: the role of sustained community-based practice and research partnerships.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure