BACKGROUND: Community engagement has been a cornerstone of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)'s HIV/AIDS clinical trials programs since 1990. Stakeholders now consider this critical to success, hence the impetus to develop evaluation approaches. OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to assess the extent to which community advisory boards (CABs) at HIV/AIDS trials sites are being integrated into research activities. METHODS: CABs and research staff (RS) at NIAID research sites were surveyed for how each viewed (a) the frequency of activities indicative of community involvement, (b) the means for identifying, prioritizing, and supporting CAB needs, and (c) mission and operational challenges. RESULTS: Overall, CABs and RS share similar views about the frequency of community involvement activities. Cluster analysis reveals three groups of sites based on activity frequency ratings, including a group notable for CAB-RS discordance. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing differences between community and researcher perceptions about the frequency of and challenges posed by specific engagement activities may prove useful in developing evaluation tools for assessing community engagement in collaborative research settings.
BACKGROUND: Community engagement has been a cornerstone of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)'s HIV/AIDS clinical trials programs since 1990. Stakeholders now consider this critical to success, hence the impetus to develop evaluation approaches. OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to assess the extent to which community advisory boards (CABs) at HIV/AIDS trials sites are being integrated into research activities. METHODS: CABs and research staff (RS) at NIAID research sites were surveyed for how each viewed (a) the frequency of activities indicative of community involvement, (b) the means for identifying, prioritizing, and supporting CAB needs, and (c) mission and operational challenges. RESULTS: Overall, CABs and RS share similar views about the frequency of community involvement activities. Cluster analysis reveals three groups of sites based on activity frequency ratings, including a group notable for CAB-RS discordance. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing differences between community and researcher perceptions about the frequency of and challenges posed by specific engagement activities may prove useful in developing evaluation tools for assessing community engagement in collaborative research settings.
Authors: Kimberly Page-Shafer; Vonthanak Saphonn; Ly Penh Sun; Mean Chhi Vun; David A Cooper; John M Kaldor Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: R P Strauss; S Sengupta; S C Quinn; J Goeppinger; C Spaulding; S M Kegeles; G Millett Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Peter A Newman; Clara Rubincam; Catherine Slack; Zaynab Essack; Venkatesan Chakrapani; Deng-Min Chuang; Suchon Tepjan; Murali Shunmugam; Surachet Roungprakhon; Carmen Logie; Jennifer Koen; Graham Lindegger Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Erin Connors; Rebecca Selove; Juan Canedo; Maureen Sanderson; Pamela Hull; Marilyn Adams; Ila McDermott; Calvin Barlow; Denice Johns-Porter; Caree McAfee; Karen Gilliam; Oscar Miller; Nora Cox; Mary Kay Fadden; Stephen King; Hilary Tindle Journal: J Health Dispar Res Pract Date: 2019