Explore the vast range of titles available.

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) and community-engaged research have been established in the past 25 years as valued research approaches within health education, public health, and other health and social sciences for their effectiveness in reducing inequities. While early literature focused on partnering principles and processes, within the past decade, individual studies, as well as systematic reviews, have increasingly documented outcomes in community support and empowerment, sustained partnerships, healthier behaviors, policy changes, and health improvements. Despite enhanced focus on research and health outcomes, the science lags behind the practice. CBPR partnering pathways that result in outcomes remain little understood, with few studies documenting best practices. Since 2006, the University of New Mexico Center for Participatory Research with the University of Washington’s Indigenous Wellness Research Institute and partners across the country has engaged in targeted investigations to fill this gap in the science. Our inquiry, spanning three stages of National Institutes of Health funding, has sought to identify which partnering practices, under which contexts and conditions, have capacity to contribute to health, research, and community outcomes. This article presents the research design of our current grant, Engage for Equity, including its history, social justice principles, theoretical bases, measures, intervention tools and resources, and preliminary findings about collective empowerment as our middle range theory of change. We end with lessons learned and recommendations for partnerships to engage in collective reflexive practice to strengthen internal power-sharing and capacity to reach health and social equity outcomes.

We developed a set of four community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership tools aimed at supporting community–academic research partnerships in strengthening their research processes, with the ultimate goal of improving research outcomes. The aim of this article is to describe the tools we developed to accomplish this goal: (1) the River of Life Exercise; (2) a Partnership Visioning Exercise; (3) a personalized Partnership Data Report of data from academic and community research partners; and (4) a Promising Practices Guide with aggregated survey data analyses on promising CBPR practices associated with CBPR and health outcomes from two national samples of CBPR projects that completed a series of two online surveys. Relying on Paulo Freire’s philosophy of praxis, or the cycles of collective reflection and action, we developed a set of tools designed to support research teams in holding discussions aimed at strengthening research partnership capacity, aligning research partnership efforts to achieve grant aims, and recalling and operationalizing larger social justice goals. This article describes the theoretical framework and process for tool development and provides preliminary data from small teams representing 25 partnerships who attended face-to-face workshops and provided their perceptions of tool accessibility and intended future use.

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships exist as complex, dynamic relationships that incorporate shared decision that supports trust development between communities and academics. Within CBPR, the interest in understanding the concept of trust has grown with the realization that, without trust, CBPR relationships fracture. A barrier to monitoring the trust health of a partnership is the lack of a shared operationalization of the concept, its antecedents, and measurement tools. To address these barriers, a six-category trust typology was created as a developmental theory of trust progress. To advance the theory, this article reports on the quantitative structural elements of the trust typology, identifies variability in trust correlates, and creates an empirical foundation for the trust types. Using Engage for Equity data, trust covariates included measures of synergy, CBPR principles, participation, and influence. Structural equation models were used to assess associations between trust types and the latent constructs measured by the items in each measure. The findings demonstrate that the six trust types generally operate on a continuum. Specifically, it does appear that trust deficit, role-based trust, functional trust, proxy trust, and reflective trust are on a single continuum from low to high. Scale scores for reflective trust and proxy trust were consistently and statistically significantly higher than those for functional trust, role-based, neutral, and trust deficit. These results support the construct validity of the trust typology as representing “higher levels” of trust phases. Due to the dynamic nature of partnerships, regular monitoring of partnership trust types can serve as a proxy for partnership functioning.

Background Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) is often used to address health inequities due to structural racism. However, much of the existing literature emphasizes relationships and synergy rather than structural components of CBPR. This study introduces and tests new theoretical mechanisms of the CBPR Conceptual Model to address this limitation. Methods Three-stage online cross-sectional survey administered from 2016 to 2018 with 165 community-engaged research projects identified through federal databases or training grants. Participants ( N  = 453) were principal investigators and project team members (both academic and community partners) who provided project-level details and perceived contexts, processes, and outcomes. Data were analyzed through structural equation modeling and fuzzy-set qualitative comparison analysis. Results Commitment to Collective Empowerment was a key mediating variable between context and intervention activities. Synergy and Community Engagement in Research Actions were mediating variables between context/partnership process and outcomes. Collective Empowerment was most strongly aligned with Synergy, while higher levels of Structural Governance and lower levels of Relationships were most consistent with higher Community Engagement in Research Actions. Conclusions The CBPR Conceptual Model identifies key theoretical mechanisms for explaining health equity and health outcomes in community-academic partnerships. The scholarly literature’s preoccupation with synergy and relationships overlooks two promising practices—Structural Governance and Collective Empowerment—that interact from contexts through mechanisms to influence outcomes. These results also expand expectations beyond a “one size fits all” for reliably producing positive outcomes.

BackgroundAccumulating evidence suggests that clinician racial/gender decision-making biases in some instances contribute to health disparities. Previous work has produced evidence of such biases in medical students.ObjectiveTo identify contextual attributes in medical schools associated on average with low levels of racial/gender clinical decision-making biases.DesignA mixed-method design using comparison case studies of 15 medical schools selected based on results of a previous survey of student decision-making bias: 7 schools whose students collectively had, and 8 schools whose students had not shown evidence of such biases.ParticipantsPurposively sampled faculty, staff, underrepresented minority medical students, and clinical-level medical students at each school.Main MeasuresQuantitative descriptive data and qualitative interview and focus group data assessing 32 school attributes theorized in the literature to be associated with formation of decision-making and biases. We used a mixed-method analytic design with standard qualitative analysis and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis.Key ResultsAcross the 15 schools, a total of 104 faculty, administrators and staff and 21 students participated in individual interviews, and 196 students participated in 29 focus groups. While no single attribute or group of attributes distinguished the two clusters of schools, analysis showed some contextual attributes were seen more commonly in schools whose students had not demonstrated biases: longitudinal reflective small group sessions; non-accusatory approach to training in diversity; longitudinal, integrated diversity curriculum; admissions priorities and action steps toward a diverse student body; and school service orientation to the community.ConclusionsWe identified several potentially modifiable elements of the training environment that are more common in schools whose students do not show evidence of racial and gender biases.

Background: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) can effectively address health disparities among groups that are historically difficult to reach, disadvantaged, of a minority status, or are otherwise underrepresented in research. Recent research has focused on the science of CBPR partnership constructs and on developing and testing tools for self-evaluation. Because CBPR requires substantial investment in human and material resources, specific factors that support successful and sustainable research partnerships must be identified. We sought to describe the evolution, implementation, and results of a self-evaluation of a CBPR partnership. Methods: Academic and community members of the Rochester Healthy Community Partnership (RHCP) and researchers from the University of New Mexico–Center for Participatory Research collaborated to evaluate RHCP with qualitative and quantitative research methods and group analysis. Results: The self-evaluation was used to provide an overall picture of the “health” of the partnership, in terms of sustainability and ability to effectively collaborate around community priorities. RHCP members revisited the partnership’s mission and values; identified associations between partnership practices, dynamics, and outcomes; and elicited insight from community and academic partners to help guide decisions about future directions and the sustainability of the partnership. Positive partnership dynamics were associated with perceived improvements in health and equity outcomes. Conclusions: Although engaging in a comprehensive self-evaluation requires substantial investment from stakeholders, such assessments have significant value because they enable partners to reflect on the mission and values of the partnership, explore the history and context for its existence, identify factors that have contributed to outcomes, and plan strategically for the future.

Community-Engaged Research (CEnR) and Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) require validated measures and metrics for evaluating research partnerships and outcomes. There is a need to adapt and translate existing measures for practical use with diverse and non-English-speaking communities. This paper describes the Spanish translation and adaptation of Engage for Equity's Community Engagement Survey (E CES), a nationally validated and empirically-supported CEnR evaluation tool, into the full-length \" ,\" and a pragmatic shorter version \" \" (FUERTES). Community and academic partners from the mainland US, Puerto Rico, and Nicaragua participated in translating and adapting E CES, preserving content validity, psychometric properties, and importance to stakeholders of items, scales, and CBPR constructs (contexts, partnership processes, intervention and research actions, and outcomes). Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and convergent validity was assessed via a correlation matrix among scales. respondents ( = 57) self-identified as primarily Latinos/as/x (97%), female (74%), and academics (61%). Cronbach's alpha values ranged from 0.72 to 0.88 for items in the context domain to 0.90-0.92 for items in the intervention/research domain. Correlations were found as expected among subscales, with the strongest relationships found for subscales within the same CBPR domain. Results informed the creation of FUERTES. and FUERTES offer CEnR/CBPR practitioners two validated instruments for assessing their research partnering practices, and outcomes. Moreover, FUERTES meets the need for shorter pragmatic tools. These measures can further strengthen CEnR/CBPR involving Latino/a/x communities within the US, Latin America, and globally.

Established community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships need tools to assist with self-evaluation of the effectiveness and engagement with CBPR principles and to inform ongoing work. A growing part of the CBPR field is focused on the evaluation of partnering processes and outcomes. The Rochester Healthy Community Partnership (RHCP), a partnership with more than a decade of engagement in health promotion research, performed a self-evaluation in collaboration with the University of New Mexico Center for Participatory Research (UNM-CPR). We collaboratively developed and implemented a facilitated self-evaluation using adaptations of existing tools and the CBPR conceptual model. Partners contributed through surveys and qualitative interviews. Initially, data were analyzed collaboratively by members of RHCP and UNM-CPR, but RHCP partners further processed and consolidated findings, leading to the development of key questions that guided a full partnership discussion of action steps. Our process confirmed the adaptability of existing tools and the CBPR conceptual model for the purpose of partnership reflection and self-evaluation. We offer the key findings of our assessment of partnering practices and directions for the future, and share our approach to collaborative analysis and dissemination. Our discussion includes lessons learned, with applicability to other established partnerships. Our experience indicates that collective reflection is empowering for members of established partnerships, which can be facilitated by engagement in self-evaluation through the use of adapted, available tools. The incorporation of participatory processes adds complexity, but leads to a level of resonance and usefulness that would not have been obtained from a traditional evaluation.