Dataset Information

Developing a model of family focused practice with consumers, families, practitioners and managers: a community based participatory research approach.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:While governments are urging adult mental health services to support consumers in the context of their family, there is little information about what family focused practice is, nor how it might be enacted. METHODS:Informed by the principles of Community Based Participatory Research, workshops were held in three rural Australian communities in 2015 to discuss the meaning of family focused practice and how such practices might be promoted. RESULTS:Participants described the need to raise community awareness about mental illness and provide practical support to the family. Participants emphasized the importance of practitioners genuinely communicating with consumers and their families about mental illness and the need for collaborative care and treatment planning. They also highlighted the challenges of living in rural places and posed some solutions. CONCLUSION:On the basis of the results and previous literature, we developed a model of family focused practice that outlined various stakeholders and their enactments. The model has the potential to inform policy, professional development and practice guidelines.

SUBMITTER: Reupert A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5791189 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing a model of family focused practice with consumers, families, practitioners and managers: a community based participatory research approach.

Reupert Andrea A Ward Bernadette B McCormick Francis F Ward Cathy C Waller Susan S Kidd Susan S

BMC health services research 20180130 1

<h4>Background</h4>While governments are urging adult mental health services to support consumers in the context of their family, there is little information about what family focused practice is, nor how it might be enacted.<h4>Methods</h4>Informed by the principles of Community Based Participatory Research, workshops were held in three rural Australian communities in 2015 to discuss the meaning of family focused practice and how such practices might be promoted.<h4>Results</h4>Participants des ...[more]

PMID: 29382350

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify a broad range of research priorities to inform the studies seeking to improve population health outcomes based on the engagement of diverse stakeholders.MethodsA multi-step, participatory and mixed-methods approach was adopted to solicit and structure the investigative themes from diverse stakeholders. The priority setting exercise involved four key phases: (1) feedback from community leadership; (2) interim ranking survey and focus group discussions during the population health symposium; (3) individual in-depth interviews with stakeholders in the community; and (4) synthesis of the research priorities from the multistep process.ResultsDiverse stakeholders in Singapore, comprising community partnership leaders, health care and social service providers, users of population health services, patients and caregivers, participated in the research priority setting exercise. Initial 14 priorities were identified from six community leadership feedback, 42 survey responses, two focus groups (n = 16) and 95 in-depth interviews. The final integrated research agenda identified six priorities: empower residents and patients to take charge of their health; improve care transition and management through relationship building and communication; enhance health-social care interface; improve respite care services for long-term caregivers; develop primary care as a driving force for care integration; and capacity building for service providers. Selected research questions in each priority area were also generated to develop novel models of care, foster collaboration, implement optimal services and enhance understanding of the end users' care needs.ConclusionsThis study illuminates that greater community engagement in research priority setting for population health can facilitate the formulation of evidence-based research agendas that matter to the care providers and service users in the community. The outcomes derived from this exercise will help focus researchers' efforts through which meaningful gains can be made for population health.

Project description:National and international codes of research conduct have been established in most industrialized nations to ensure greater adherence to ethical research practices. Despite these safeguards, however, traditional research approaches often continue to stigmatize marginalized and vulnerable communities. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has evolved as an effective new research paradigm that attempts to make research a more inclusive and democratic process by fostering the development of partnerships between communities and academics to address community-relevant research priorities. As such, it attempts to redress ethical concerns that have emerged out of more traditional paradigms. Nevertheless, new and emerging ethical dilemmas are commonly associated with CBPR and are rarely addressed in traditional ethical reviews. We conducted a content analysis of forms and guidelines commonly used by institutional review boards (IRBs) in the USA and research ethics boards (REBs) in Canada. Our intent was to see if the forms used by boards reflected common CBPR experience. We drew our sample from affiliated members of the US-based Association of Schools of Public Health and from Canadian universities that offered graduate public health training. This convenience sample (n = 30) was garnered from programs where application forms were available online for download between July and August, 2004. Results show that ethical review forms and guidelines overwhelmingly operate within a biomedical framework that rarely takes into account common CBPR experience. They are primarily focused on the principle of assessing risk to individuals and not to communities and continue to perpetuate the notion that the domain of "knowledge production" is the sole right of academic researchers. Consequently, IRBs and REBs may be unintentionally placing communities at risk by continuing to use procedures inappropriate or unsuitable for CBPR. IRB/REB procedures require a new framework more suitable for CBPR, and we propose alternative questions and procedures that may be utilized when assessing the ethical appropriateness of CBPR.

Dataset Information

Developing a model of family focused practice with consumers, families, practitioners and managers: a community based participatory research approach.

Publications

Developing a model of family focused practice with consumers, families, practitioners and managers: a community based participatory research approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure