A Participatory, Mixed Methods Approach to Define and Measure Partnership Synergy in Long-standing Equity-focused CBPR Partnerships.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Coombe CM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7772255 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A Participatory, Mixed Methods Approach to Define and Measure Partnership Synergy in Long-standing Equity-focused CBPR Partnerships.
Coombe Chris M CM Chandanabhumma P Paul PP Bhardwaj Prachi P Brush Barbara L BL Greene-Moton Ella E Jensen Megan M Lachance Laurie L Lee S Y Daniel SYD Meisenheimer Melanie M Minkler Meredith M Muhammad Michael M Reyes Angela G AG Rowe Zachary Z Wilson-Powers Eliza E Israel Barbara A BA
American journal of community psychology 20200803 3-4
Understanding what contributes to success of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships is essential to ensuring their effectiveness in addressing health disparities and health inequities. Synergy, the concept of accomplishing more together than separately, is central to partnership effectiveness. However, synergy specific to long-standing, equity-focused CBPR partnerships has not been closely examined. To address this, we defined and developed measures of partnership synergy as ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:In recent decades, there has been remarkable growth in scholarship examining the usefulness of community-engaged research (CEnR) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) for eliminating health inequities.This article seeks to synthesize the extant literature of systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and other related reviews regarding the context, processes, and research designs and interventions underlying CEnR that optimize its effectiveness. Through a scoping review, we have utilized an empirically derived framework of CBPR to map this literature and identify key findings and priorities for future research. Our study found 100 reviews of CEnR that largely support the CBPR conceptual framework.
| S-EPMC8095013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAddressing health inequities across chronic diseases is a critical public health objective, and policy, systems, and environmental (PSE) change approaches are integral to achieving this goal. However, assumptions about mechanisms of effect or population salience of PSE approaches do not necessarily generalize to inequitable social and economic contexts, partially due to limited ability to operationalize the dynamic complexity of such contexts. Systems thinking applications have the potential to characterize this complexity and improve understanding of where and how to intervene.MethodsThe Getting to Equity in Obesity Prevention Framework (GTE) posits a theory of change involving PSE-related considerations for achieving equity grouped into four categories with a general systems feedback structure. We used systems mapping with a case study to explore the anticipated synergy across categories of the GTE. Data were extracted from a narrative account of childhood obesity prevention initiatives in a predominantly African American and Hispanic, urban public-school district: the Philadelphia Childhood Obesity Declines Project. Project documentation described PSE strategies and contextual influences thought to have contributed to concurrently observed declines in child obesity prevalence and disparities in this population.ResultsOur final dynamic framework, which was anchored by Philadelphia's Universal Feeding Pilot for school meals, identified synergies among intervention strategies. The systems map revealed how planned and unplanned processes accumulated to align with the observed disparities reductions in the participating school district, consistent with the GTE theory of change. Community context dynamics, which evolved over time, were prominent features of the map.DiscussionThis case study enhances the utility of the GTE framework when paired with systems mapping enabled by detailed documentation of PSE initiatives and relevant contextual influences. This suggests that prospective mapping of considerations prompted by the GTE could improve anticipation of unplanned pathways, intervention design, and implementation and supports a need for greater priority for using systems mapping or other systems science tools and methodologies in obesity-prevention research and practice.
| S-EPMC11884243 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommunity-based participatory research (CBPR) is a collaborative research approach that engages academic researchers and community stakeholders as equal partners in all research steps to address community concerns and achieve health equity. The CBPR approach has been widely used in vaccination promotion programmes. However, the elements and steps of CBPR-based programmes varied among studies. The purpose of this scoping review was to synthesize the elements and steps, and establish an implementation framework to guide the utilisation of CBPR approaches in vaccination promotion.MethodsThis scoping review was performed in accordance with Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage framework. A systematic search was conducted on a set of electronic databases and grey literature sources. The retrieved articles were screened according to the criteria of CBPR and vaccination promotion, and data were extracted and recorded on a calibrated and predefined form in terms of study characteristics and CBPR components. Two authors worked independently to complete literature search, study selection, and data extraction. A narrative summary was used in categorising characteristics, and the contents of the included studies were summarised through qualitative analysis.ResultsA total of 8557 publications were initially screened, and 23 articles were finally included. According to the CBPR conceptual model, the elements in each CBPR component specifically for vaccination promotion included (1) the establishment of community-academic partnership (CAP)s, (2) community capacity building by partner training vaccination knowledge, research literacy, and service abilities and skills, (3) development and implementation of community-based intervention and (4) Outcome evaluation. A CAP was established between academic researchers or institutes and eight types of partners, including community service organisation-related non-government organisations (NGOs), health service institution-related NGOs, religious organisations, government agencies, educational institutions, media agencies, business agencies, and community representatives. The maintenance of CAP was achieved with four key strategies, namely, strengthening communication, forming management groups, sharing resources and information, and providing incentives. Twelve studies provided comprehensive insights into the strategies employed for intervention development, utilising either quantitative surveys, qualitative methods or a combination of both approaches. The contents of interventions included health service supports, health education activities, social marketing campaigns, community mobilisation, interactive discussions, vaccination reminders and incentives. As for outcome evaluation, vaccination rate and the effectiveness of interventions were assessed. A considerable increase was observed in 95.7% of the included studies (22/23), and the highest increase (92.9%) was attained after the intervention. An implementation framework was generated to summarise the elements and steps of CBPR approaches for vaccination promotion.ConclusionsThis review summarised current evidence and generated an implementation framework to elucidate the elements and steps in the development and application of CBPR approaches in vaccination promotion. CBPR approaches are recommended for future vaccination promotion programmes, involving community stakeholders and research professionals, to ensure equitable access to vaccinations across diverse populations.
| S-EPMC11539765 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis formative study leveraged a community-academic partnership to identify barriers to care that are potential sources of breast cancer disparities in Black women. Through this partnership and using a community-based participatory research approach, the objective was to develop a community task force to inform future interventions aimed at addressing breast cancer disparities and increasing health equity.MethodsThe authors assessed gaps in care related to breast cancer in Buffalo, New York, by collecting and analyzing qualitative data from focus groups and interviews with breast cancer survivors and breast navigation groups assessing barriers and facilitators across the cancer care continuum. Then, community-based participatory research approaches were used to build a task force to develop an action plan addressing gaps in care.ResultsThe authors conducted a thematic analysis of qualitative findings to understand barriers and facilitators to cancer care. Three main domains of themes emerged, including medical mistrust, fear, and stigma; the importance of patient navigation as a form of social support; and the importance of faith and faith-based community. Finally, the findings were presented to a newly formed community task force to validate the data collected and set future priorities to address breast cancer disparities and increase breast health equity in the region.ConclusionsThe authors observed that health equity is a critically important issue in cancer care and that developing culturally tailored interventions has the potential to improve care delivery and reduce breast cancer disparities. Learning from and working with community members helps set the future agenda related to health equity.Plain language summaryOur overall goal was to assess gaps in breast cancer care in Buffalo, New York, and to use community-based participatory approaches to build a task force to work toward breast health equity. Recent and historical data indicate that the Western New York community is facing a continued wide gap in breast cancer mortality trends between Black and White patients. We collected qualitative data to understand potential sources of inequity related to breast cancer and presented findings to a community task force to set future priorities for addressing breast cancer disparities and increasing breast health equity in our region.
| S-EPMC10513749 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Global health partnerships (GHPs) involve complex relationships between individuals and organizations, often joining partners from high-income and low- or middle-income countries around work that is carried out in the latter. Therefore, GHPs are situated in the context of global inequities and their underlying sociopolitical and historical causes, such as colonization. Equity is a core principle that should guide GHPs from start to end. How equity is embedded and nurtured throughout a partnership has remained a constant challenge. We have developed a user-friendly tool for valuing a GHP throughout its lifespan using an equity lens. The development of the EQT was informed by 5 distinct elements: a scoping review of scientific published peer-reviewed literature; an online survey and follow-up telephone interviews; workshops in Canada, Burkina Faso, and Vietnam; a critical interpretive synthesis; and a content validation exercise. Findings suggest GHPs generate experiences of equity or inequity yet provide little guidance on how to identify and respond to these experiences. The EQT can guide people involved in partnering to consider the equity implications of all their actions, from inception, through implementation and completion of a partnership. When used to guide reflective dialogue with a clear intention to advance equity in and through partnering, this tool offers a new approach to valuing global health partnerships. Global health practitioners, among others, can apply the EQT in their partnerships to learning together about how to cultivate equity in their unique contexts within what is becoming an increasingly diverse, vibrant, and responsive global health community.
| S-EPMC9053142 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Participatory systems thinking methods are often used in community-based participatory research to engage and respond to complexity. Participation in systems thinking activities creates opportunities for participants to gain useful insights about complexity. It is desirable to design activities that extend the benefits of this participation into communities, as these insights are predictive of success in community-based prevention. This study tests an online, computer-mediated participatory system modelling platform (STICKE) and associated methods for collating and analysing its outputs. STICKE was trialled among a group of community members to test a computer-mediated system modelling exercise. The causal diagrams resulting from the exercise were then merged, and network analysis and DEMATEL methods applied to inform the generation of a smaller summary model to communicate insights from the participant group as a whole. Participants successfully completed the online modelling activity, and created causal diagrams consistent with expectations. The DEMATEL analysis was identified as the participant-preferred method for converging individuals causal diagrams into a coherent and useful summary. STICKE is an accessible tool that enabled participants to create causal diagrams online. Methods trialled in this study provide a protocol for combining and summarising individual causal diagrams that was perceived to be useful by the participant group. STICKE supports communities to consider and respond to complex problems at a local level, which is cornerstone of sustainable effective prevention. Understanding how communities perceive their own health challenges will be important to better support and inform locally owned prevention efforts.
| S-EPMC7031223 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn most countries, public health partnerships exist to advance national tobacco control. We assessed characteristics related to tobacco control partnership capacity across Europe.MethodsWe developed a tool to assess partnership characteristics related to their theoretical capacity to influence policy. The tool was based on an existing framework in the literature, which we adapted for the tobacco control field, through an expert panel, insights from the literature and pilot tests. The tool consists of three dimensions: resources (8 items), member characteristics (2 items), and organizational characteristics (8 items) and was administered to 18 European partnerships across 17 European countries in 2019.ResultsWhereas several characteristics likely related to tobacco control partnership capacity were highly prevalent across European partnerships, some were not. Of all 18 partnerships, 5 did not include professional lobbyists, 7 did not have access to national information on tobacco industry presence and lobbying, 9 had no influence on national research agendas, and 7 did not maintain working relationships with the relevant Minister or Secretary of State. Furthermore, 5 of 18 partnerships had no agreement on roles and responsibilities of member organizations, and 6 had no agreement on how credits are divided across member organizations. A leadership figure was absent in 6 of 18 partnerships.ConclusionsThis study confirms that tobacco control partnerships vary greatly in the extent to which they possess characteristics associated with their ability to advance tobacco control. There is much room for improvement of European tobacco control partnerships.
| S-EPMC8135572 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPrevious studies have identified "trust" as a key mechanism to achieve sustainable partnerships in participatory health research, which themselves can represent social networks. A recent review discussed the potential for social network analysis to investigate the development and maintenance of trust and its effects on partnership functioning in participatory health research partnerships. This review also recommended considering a comprehensive, nuanced and multidimensional approach to conceptualizing, operationalizing and measuring trust in research partnerships. Thus, this study aims to explore empirically the conceptualizing, operationalizing and measuring of trust in a multidimensional manner, approaching each trust dimension as an individual trust network, as well as combined as an overall trust network.MethodsWe sampled the whole network, recruiting from a newly established network of 57 individuals that must collaborate to achieve a common goal. These individuals represented academic, service and community organizations of an existing participatory partnership, the Public and Patient Involvement Ignite Network in Ireland. Of the 57 individuals invited to take part in the study, 75% (n = 43) individuals completed the network survey. A survey about trust was designed based on literature in the area and was administered via Qualtrics. The survey included eight network questions: one on collaboration, and seven on specific dimensions of trust. From this, we constructed a network for each trust dimension. We compared several core network measures of each to identify structural differences between the dimensions of trust. To statistically validate them, we compared them to a random and preferential null model.ResultsAll the networks had a high reciprocity but were decentralized. Key differences were identified across trust dimensions, particularly in terms of integrity and shared values, visions and goals. None of the networks compared well to the null models indicating participants did not randomly or preferentially (based on how much trust they receive for a particular trust dimension) trust other partners.Discussion/conclusionThis novel empirical social network analysis of trust in a real-world partnership elucidates the nuances and multidimensional nature of trust. This provides support for expanding this research direction to enhance understanding of and interventions for trust in participatory health research.
| S-EPMC9298888 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe effectiveness of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships to address health inequities is well documented. CBPR integrates knowledge and perspectives of diverse communities throughout the research process, following principles that emphasize trust, power sharing, co-learning, and mutual benefits. However, institutions and funders seldom provide the time and resources needed for the critical stage of equitable partnership formation and development.MethodsSince 2011, the Detroit Urban Research Center, collaborating with other entities, has promoted the development of new community-academic research partnerships through two grant programs that combine seed funding with capacity building support from community and academic instructors/mentors experienced in CBPR. Process and outcomes were evaluated using mixed methods.ResultsFrom 2011 to 2021, 50 partnerships received grants ranging from $2,500 to $30,000, totaling $605,000. Outcomes included equitable partnership infrastructure and processes, innovative pilot research, translation of findings to interventions and policy change, dissemination to multiple audiences, new proposals and projects, and sustained community-academic research partnerships. All partnerships continued beyond the program; over half secured additional funding.ConclusionsKeys to success included participation as community-academic teams, dedicated time for partnership/relationship development, workshops to develop equity-based skills, relationships, and projects, expert community-academic instructor guidance, and connection to additional resources. Findings demonstrate that small amounts of seed funding for newly forming community-academic partnerships, paired with capacity building support, can provide essential time and resources needed to develop diverse, inclusive, equity-focused CBPR partnerships. Building such support into funding initiatives and through academic institutions can enhance impact and sustainability of translational research toward advancing health equity.
| S-EPMC9879886 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGlobal health partnerships (GHPs) are situated in complex political and economic relationships and involve partners with different needs and interests (e.g., government agencies, non-governmental organizations, corporations, universities, professional associations, philanthropic organizations and communities). As part of a mixed methods study designed to develop an equity-sensitive tool to support more equity-centred North-South GHPs, this critical interpretive synthesis examined reported assessments of GHPs.ResultsWe examined 30 peer-reviewed articles for power dynamics, equity and inequities, and contradictions or challenges encountered in North-South partnerships. Among articles reviewed, authors most often situated GHPs around a topical focus on research, capacity-building, clinical, or health services issues, with the 'work' of the partnership aiming to foster skills or respond to community needs. The specific features of GHPs that were assessed varied widely, with consistently-reported elements including the early phases of partnering; governance issues; the day-to-day work of partnerships; the performance, impacts and benefits of GHPs; and issues of inclusion. Articles shared a general interest in partnering processes and often touched briefly on issues of equity; but they rarely accounted for the complexity of sociopolitical and historical contexts shaping issues of equity in GHPs. Further, assessments of GHPs were often reported without inclusion of voices from all partners or named beneficiaries. GHPs were frequently portrayed as inherently beneficial for Southern partners, without attention to power dynamics and inequities (North-South, South-South). Though historical and political dynamics of the Global North and South were inconsistently examined as influential forces in GHPs, such dynamics were frequently portrayed as complex and characterized by asymmetries in power and resources. Generally, assessments of GHPs paid little attention to the macroeconomic forces in the power and resource dynamics of GHPs highlights the importance of considering the broader political. Our findings suggest that GHPs can serve to entrench both inequitable relationships and unfair distributions of power, resources, and wealth within and between countries (and partners) if inequitable power relationships are left unmitigated.ConclusionsWe argue that specific practices could enhance GHPs' contributions to equity, both in their processes and outcomes. Enhancing partnering practices to focus on inclusion, responsiveness to North-South and South-South inequities, and recognition of GHPs as situated in a broader (and inequitable) political economy. A relational and equity-centred approach to assessing GHPs would place social justice, humility and mutual benefits as central practices-that is, regular, routine things that partners involved in partnering do intentionally to make GHPs function well. Practicing equity in GHPs requires continuous efforts to explicitly acknowledge and examine the equity implications of all aspects of partnering.
| S-EPMC8254362 | biostudies-literature