Literature DB >> 20208242

Assessing process and outcomes: evaluating community-based participatory research.

Marj Plumb1, Natalie Collins, Janna N Cordeiro, Mhel Kavanaugh-Lynch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The California Breast Cancer Research Program (CBCRP) Community Research Collaboration (CRC) Awards fund research projects conducted by partnerships between community members and academically trained research scientists.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the relationship, if any, between the collaborative process of conducting the CRC projects and reported outcomes.
METHODS: Community and academic researchers from the first seven CRC full award projects were interviewed in one-on-one, standardized, semistructured telephone interviews. Twelve of thirteen eligible community partners and all nine eligible academic partners were interviewed (some teams had multiple community or academic partners). Interview questions covered four major types of outcomes (improved methodology [four items], benefited community [sixitems], benefited researchers [three items], or influenced health services and policy [five items]) and three major aspects of the partnership (collaboration among partners [three items], group dynamics [five items], and community involvement [two items]). Process and outcome scores for each team were compared using a scatter plot graph. RESULT: Teams were most effective at improving the quality of research methodology, providing benefits to the participating community agency, and answering questions important to the communities involved. Areas of difficulty for the teams included collaborative data analysis, power sharing, and managing the impact of turnover. Although the projects varied in the measures of the partnership process, the three teams that had the highest outcome scores also had the highest scores for the partnership process.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the relationship between process and outcomes is not necessarily causal, these results suggest an association worthy of further investigation.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 20208242     DOI: 10.1353/cpr.0.0020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh        ISSN: 1557-0541


  10 in total

1.  Time, dual roles, and departments of public health: lessons learned in CBPR by an AIDS service organization.

Authors:  Christopher A Cole; E Jennifer Edelman; Nicholas Boshnack; Heidi Jenkins; Wanda Richardson; Marjorie S Rosenthal
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2013

2.  Evaluation of community-academic partnership functioning: center for the elimination of hepatitis B health disparities.

Authors:  Nancy VanDevanter; Simona Kwon; Shao-Chee Sim; Kay Chun; Chau Trinh-Shevrin
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2011

3.  Understanding the Benefit-Cost Relationship in Long-standing Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Partnerships: Findings from the Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) Study.

Authors:  Laurie Lachance; Chris M Coombe; Barbara L Brush; Shoou-Yih Daniel Lee; Megan Jensen; Brianna Taffe; Prachi Bhardwaj; Michael Muhammad; Eliza Wilson-Powers; Zachary Rowe; Cleopatra H Caldwell; Barbara A Israel
Journal:  J Appl Behav Sci       Date:  2020-11-12

4.  Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success: Theory and Methods for Measuring Success in Long-Standing Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships.

Authors:  Barbara A Israel; Laurie Lachance; Chris M Coombe; Shoou-Yih D Lee; Megan Jensen; Eliza Wilson-Powers; Graciela Mentz; Michael Muhammad; Zachary Rowe; Angela G Reyes; Barbara L Brush
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2020

5.  "There's Gotta be Some Give and Take": Community Partner Perspectives on Benefits and Contributions associated with Community Partnerships for Youth.

Authors:  Liezl Alcantara; Gary W Harper; Christopher B Keys
Journal:  Youth Soc       Date:  2015-07-01

6.  Facilitating Meaningful Engagement on Community Advisory Committees in Patient-Centered Outcome Research.

Authors:  Gabrielle Kelly; Shi-Yi Wang; Georgina Lucas; Liana Fraenkel; Cary P Gross
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2017

7.  Characteristics of successful community partnerships to promote physical activity among young people, North Carolina, 2010-2012.

Authors:  Joni D Nelson; Justin B Moore; Christine Blake; Sara F Morris; Mary Bea Kolbe
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 2.830

8.  Development and Evaluation of a Training Program for Community-Based Participatory Research in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Marj Plumb; Senaida Fernandez Poole; Heather Sarantis; Susan Braun; Janna Cordeiro; Juliana Van Olphen; Marion Kavanaugh-Lynch
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Getting England to be more physically active: are the Public Health Responsibility Deal's physical activity pledges the answer?

Authors:  C Knai; M Petticrew; C Scott; M A Durand; E Eastmure; L James; A Mehrotra; N Mays
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 6.457

10.  Doing What We Know, Knowing What to Do: Californians Linking Action with Science for Prevention of Breast Cancer (CLASP-BC).

Authors:  Jon F Kerner; Marion H E Kavanaugh-Lynch; Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati; Christopher Politis; Aviva Prager; Ross C Brownson
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 3.390

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.