Community Engagement Studios: A Structured Approach to Obtaining Meaningful Input From Stakeholders to Inform Research

Yvonne A Joosten, Tiffany L Israel, Neely A Williams, Leslie R Boone, David G Schlundt, Charles P Mouton, Robert S Dittus, Gordon R Bernard, Consuelo H Wilkins, Yvonne A Joosten, Tiffany L Israel, Neely A Williams, Leslie R Boone, David G Schlundt, Charles P Mouton, Robert S Dittus, Gordon R Bernard, Consuelo H Wilkins

Abstract

Problem: Engaging communities in research increases its relevance and may speed the translation of discoveries into improved health outcomes. Many researchers lack training to effectively engage stakeholders, whereas academic institutions lack infrastructure to support community engagement.

Approach: In 2009, the Meharry-Vanderbilt Community-Engaged Research Core began testing new approaches for community engagement, which led to the development of the Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio). This structured program facilitates project-specific input from community and patient stakeholders to enhance research design, implementation, and dissemination. Developers used a team approach to recruit and train stakeholders, prepare researchers to engage with stakeholders, and facilitate an in-person meeting with both.

Outcomes: The research core has implemented 28 CE Studios that engaged 152 community stakeholders. Participating researchers, representing a broad range of faculty ranks and disciplines, reported that input from stakeholders was valuable and that the CE Studio helped determine project feasibility and enhanced research design and implementation. Stakeholders found the CE Studio to be an acceptable method of engagement and reported a better understanding of research in general. A tool kit was developed to replicate this model and to disseminate this approach.

Next steps: The research core will collect data to better understand the impact of CE Studios on research proposal submissions, funding, research outcomes, patient and stakeholder engagement in projects, and dissemination of results. They will also collect data to determine whether CE Studios increase patient-centered approaches in research and whether stakeholders who participate have more trust and willingness to participate in research.

Conflict of interest statement

Other disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The process for requesting and implementing a Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio). A CE Studio, developed by the Meharry-Vanderbilt Community-Engaged Research Core in 2009, is a structured process facilitating project-specific input from community and patient stakeholders to enhance research design, implementation, and dissemination.

References

    1. Wilkins CH, Spofford M, Williams N, et al. CTSA Consortium’s Community Engagement Key Function Committee Community Partners Integration Workgroup. Community representatives’ involvement in Clinical and Translational Science Awardee activities. Clin Transl Sci. 2013;6:292–296.
    1. Leshner AI, Terry SF, Schultz AM, Liverman CT. The CTSA Program at NIH: Opportunities for Advancing Clinical and Translational Research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2013.
    1. Michener L, Cook J, Ahmed SM, Yonas MA, Coyne-Beasley T, Aguilar-Gaxiola S. Aligning the goals of community-engaged research: Why and how academic health centers can successfully engage with communities to improve health. Acad Med. 2012;87:285–291.
    1. Sung NS, Crowley WF, Jr, Genel M, et al. Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise. JAMA. 2003;289:1278–1287.
    1. McCloskey DJ, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Michener JL. Principles of Community Engagement. 2nd ed. Bethesda, Md: National Institutes of Health; 2011. Publication 11-7782.
    1. Staley K. Exploring Impact: Public Involvement in NHS, Public Health and Social Care Research. Eastleigh, UK: INVOLVE; 2009.
    1. McLaughlin H. Involving young service users as co-researchers: Possibilities, benefits and costs. Br J Soc Work. 2006;36:1395–1410.
    1. Byrne DW, Biaggioni I, Bernard GR, et al. Clinical and translational research studios: A multidisciplinary internal support program. Acad Med. 2012;87:1052–1059.
    1. Pulley JM, Bernard GR. Proven processes: The Vanderbilt Institute for clinical and translational research. Clin Transl Sci. 2009;2:180–182.
    1. Improving patient engagement and understanding its impact on research through community review boards. 2013. . Accessed April 10, 2014.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj