Building an Inclusive Research Team: The Importance of Team Building and Skills Training

What if we consider research teams as teams?

Research teams are an important means by which knowledge is generated in Health Professions Education (HPE). Although funding agencies encourage the formation of interdisciplinary and interprofessional research teams, we know little about how our interdisciplinary and interprofessional research teams are functioning, nor how best to ensure their success. Indeed, while HPE Scholarship Units and research environments have been the object of study, little work has been focused on research teams themselves. In this article, the authors propose that research teams should be studied as unique instantiations of teams where several individuals work together towards a common goal. Considering research teams as a team can encourage attention to how effective teams are built, supported, and celebrated, it can acknowledge that competent individuals may form incompetent teams, and it opens important avenues for future research. Turning our attention to better understanding how and when research teams thrive should support the development of more effective teams; resulting in reduced waste and redundancy, better mobilization of team members' time and skills, and enhanced knowledge generation. Considering research teams as teams, encourages an understanding that these teams require care, commitment, and effort to sustain them, and it acknowledges that pursuing research in a team context is both a collaborative and a social endeavour.

Research About Us, With Us: An Inclusive Research Case Study

Inclusive research combines the expertise of academically trained researchers with the lived experience of individuals with disabilities to render results that are more accessible, accountable, and meaningful to the disability community. In this case study, adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) contributed as co-researchers to a series of studies on mental health of adults with intellectual disability. The research model, specific engagement strategies, and lessons learned are shared. Feedback from members of the research team suggests that including adults with IDD as co-researchers benefited investigators, co-researchers with IDD, and project outcomes. Our case study emphasizes the valuable contributions of research partners with IDD and provides a model that may be adapted and utilized by researchers to enhance their practice.

A protocol for the safe recruitment of Indigenous and Black women experiencing intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic into a large mixed methods study: The Sisters by Choice Study

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a complex and pervasive public health problem disproportionately affecting Indigenous and Black women. During the COVID-19 pandemic, IPV became more complicated for advocates because social distancing, quarantine, and isolation measures further endangered women experiencing IPV. This manuscript is based on an ongoing community-engaged study in an upper Midwestern state. Our primary goal for this study is to generate urgently needed knowledge on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Indigenous and Black women's help-seeking behaviours following IPV by systematically documenting barriers women faced during the pandemic. Engaging women in a large study that seeks to garner information about their experiences of violence is complex and challenging and requires significant planning, especially for ensuring participants' safety. In this write-up, we detail the safety planning protocol developed for the purposes of recruiting and engaging women in rural and urban areas in an upper Midwestern state in the United States. Our goal is to provide scholars conducting research in the area of violence with practical considerations for safely conducting a study of this nature.

Developing and implementing a public health co-research program for Special Olympics athletes

Individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities are often the subject of research while rarely being included in formulating research questions, planning studies, and making decisions related to protocols and analyses. In turn, most research regarding people with intellectual and developmental disabilities is not carried out by researchers with disabilities themselves. We developed a co-research training program where individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities were taught about research. The program was designed using best practices and existing materials resources. We recruited four participants from Special Olympics Massachusetts and conducted the training in the Fall of 2021. We evaluated the program with surveys, qualitative interviews, and tracking continued involvement of co-researchers in research projects. Participants were partners in the evaluation process. The training program was six sessions and included lessons about why research is important, how to conduct research, and an experiential learning project where co-researchers conducted a study of their coaches. The program was well received by participants, and one year later they were still involved with research projects. A co-researcher training focused on public health for Special Olympics athletes is feasible and beneficial for athletes, researchers, and Special Olympics programs. However, there are still barriers like a lack of funding and time, that need to be addressed to ensure wide program success.

Barriers and facilitators to the recruitment of disabled people to clinical trials: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Underrepresentation of disabled groups in clinical trials results in an inadequate evidence base for their clinical care, which drives health inequalities. This study aims to review and map the potential barriers and facilitators to the recruitment of disabled people in clinical trials to identify knowledge gaps and areas for further extensive research. The review addresses the question: 'What are the barriers and facilitators to recruitment of disabled people to clinical trials?'.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Scoping review guidelines were followed to complete the current scoping review. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched via Ovid. The literature search was guided by a combination of four key concepts from the research question: (1) disabled populations, (2) patient recruitment, (3) barriers and facilitators, and (4) clinical trials. Papers discussing barriers and facilitators of all types were included. Papers that did not have at least one disabled group as their population were excluded. Data on study characteristics and identified barriers and facilitators were extracted. Identified barriers and facilitators were then synthesised according to common themes.

RESULTS

The review included 56 eligible papers. The evidence on barriers and facilitators was largely sourced from Short Communications from Researcher Perspectives (N = 22) and Primary Quantitative Research (N = 17). Carer perspectives were rarely represented in articles. The most common disability types for the population of interest in the literature were neurological and psychiatric disabilities. A total of five emergent themes were determined across the barriers and facilitators. These were as follows: risk vs benefit assessment, design and management of recruitment protocol, balancing internal and external validity considerations, consent and ethics, and systemic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Both barriers and facilitators were often highly specific to disability type and context. Assumptions should be minimised, and study design should prioritise principles of co-design and be informed by a data-driven assessment of needs for the study population. Person-centred approaches to consent that empower disabled people to exercise their right to choose should be adopted in inclusive practice. Implementing these recommendations stands to improve inclusive practices in clinical trial research, serving to produce a well-rounded and comprehensive evidence base.

Self-advocates with Down syndrome research the lived experiences of COVID-19 lockdowns in Aotearoa New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Individuals with Down syndrome are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 because they are recognised as significantly immunocompromised. Yet their voices regarding their lived experiences of pandemic lockdowns have not been sought or heard.

AIM

This study aims to describe the lived experiences of people with Down syndrome during the pandemic lockdowns in Aotearoa New Zealand to add evidence in order to inform systemic advocacy.

METHOD

A mixed-methods approach positioned within an inclusive research paradigm was used, in which a group of self-advocates with Down syndrome co-designed a structured interview schedule and conducted 40 face-to-face interviews. Key themes were identified by using content analysis.

RESULTS

Despite the difficulties associated with lockdowns and participants not receiving their usual supports and having to make significant adjustments, they remained positive, adapted well, and demonstrated a high level of resilience and adaptability.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings add to the limited research on the lived experiences of people with Down syndrome during pandemic lockdowns. This research has given them a voice to contribute to policy, government initiatives, and service providers; particularly on issues around support during lockdown and staying connected with others.

On the Road Together: Issues Observed in the Process of a Research Duo Working Together in a Long-Term and Intense Collaboration in an Inclusive Research Project

Inclusive research practices can lead to progress towards an inclusive society. With this study, we aimed to gain insight into dilemmas and catalysing processes within the long-term collaboration of an inclusive research duo: one non-academic researcher who lives with the label of intellectual disabilities and visual impairment, and one academic researcher. Both researchers kept personal diaries about their collaboration process. Inductive thematic analysis, individually and as a group of authors, was employed. Our findings reveal six necessary conditions for diversity-sensitive work in inclusive research: (a) experiencing belonging within the research group, (b) empowering people in a team through growing self-awareness and competence-building, (c) having room for reflection and searching for various ways of communication, (d) sharing power and ownership of research processes, (e) having enough time to foster the above conditions, and (f) joining in a mutual engagement in accommodating vulnerability in dialogue and collaborative work. Awareness of stigma-related issues and the risk of tokenism is also required.

A Closer Look at the Quest for an Inclusive Research Project: ‘I Had No Experience with Scientific Research, and then the Ball of Cooperation Started Rolling’

The original adage of the movement of people with disabilities ‘Nothing about us without us’ is fortunately more and more adopted in the research world. There is, for example, increasing recognition of the importance and value of actively involving people with intellectual disabilities in research projects on topics that are relevant to them. In a current doctoral research project, a co-researcher with an intellectual disability was recruited to work together with the doctoral researcher. Now that this project is nearing completion, it is time to look at some aspects of their collaboration and see what we can learn from this process. In several (joint) meetings, the researchers reflected on their personal experiences with working and researching together. Our reflections are presented using three overarching themes: preparations for the collaboration, collaborating as a complex process, and conducting research together. The discussion focuses on what can be inferred from these personal experiences with regard to the following three topics: how inclusive research can be organised best, the possible benefits of the collaboration for the researchers involved, and the possible impact of the collaboration on the quality of the research.

Reflections on Working Together in an Inclusive Research Team

The funding of a research project working with local governments and people with intellectual disabilities led to the establishment of an inclusive research team within a university faculty. The core team consisted of four people, including a design researcher, an architect, a disability advocate and a community researcher/self-advocate. Though there are ample attention and resources devoted to the front-facing parts of a university being visibly inclusive—mostly from a physical access perspective or focussed on the student experience—less attention has been directed to what it means to develop and support inclusive research and aligned work opportunities for people with intellectual disabilities within a university campus. For this reason, the paper explores what it was like for our team that included non-traditional academics and people with intellectual disabilities to work at a university in a design school (not a disability-related research centre). We employ a process of collaborative autoethnography to reflect on how different team members took the lead across different parts of the study. We conclude with a set of tips for the development of more inclusive research teams within university settings.

How Being a Researcher Impacted My Life

Doing research can help people to learn about a lot of different topics. For example, researchers can learn how to work in a group, collect and analyze data, how to make accessible materials, and get to know their own strengths. In this paper, a researcher shares what she learned while working on two research projects about young adults with intellectual/developmental disabilities and co-occurring mental health conditions. The first project was peer mentoring. In this project, we focused on individual needs for someone who may be struggling with mental health. The second project was about workplace disclosure. In this project, we tried to find out if young adults disclose their mental health conditions at work and in job interviews. We explain how we did the projects, how the researcher learned to do research, and what made it easy to learn. We also share about the impact of doing research on the researcher’s personal life. Finally, we share why doing inclusive research is important and how to help researchers with disabilities feel like they are valued members of the research team.

Codesigning patient experience measures for and with children and young people with intellectual disability: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Children and young people with intellectual disability represent one of the most vulnerable groups in healthcare, yet they remain under-represented in projects to design, develop and/or improve healthcare service delivery. Increasingly, healthcare services are using various codesign and coproduction methodologies to engage children and young people in service delivery improvements.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study employs an inclusive approach to the study design and execution, including two co-researchers who are young people with intellectual disability on the project team. We will follow an adapted experience-based co-design methodology to enable children and young people with intellectual disability to participate fully in the co-design of a prototype tool for eliciting patient experience data from children and young people with intellectual disability in hospital.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was granted ethical approval on 1 February 2021 by the Sydney Children's Hospitals Network Human Research Ethics Committee, reference number 2020/ETH02898. Dissemination plan includes publications, doctoral thesis chapter, educational videos. A summary of findings will be shared with all participants and presented at the organisation quality and safety committee.

Effect of interactive video-based instruction on learning performance in relation to social skills of children with intellectual disability

Interactive video-based instruction (IVBI) session was organized in day-care rehabilitation settings to provide training in acquiring new skills related to social skills development for targeted moderate intellectual disability (MID) population. The main objective is to inter-relate the effect of individual and collaborative interactive video-based instruction on social skills development for experimental group children with those in the comparison group. A quasi-experimental design was conducted on (n = 99, comprising 56 males and 43 females) students with MID from selected three rehabilitation centres of Guwahati, Assam, India. The mean and standard deviation of individual interactive video-based instruction (IIVBI) and collaborative interactive video-based instruction (CIVBI) was better than the conventional group. The ANCOVA result shows a significant effect of IIVBI and CIVBI in the improvement of social skills over conventional approach on students after controlling the effect of the pre-test. The interactive session in both the experimental group allowed the students to create their own space for learning social skills via different activities using IVBI. The researchers concludes that regular practice of various activities through video sessions can help children with intellectual disability to overcome minor obstacles by themselves without any additional service.

How people with intellectual and developmental disabilities on collaborative research teams use technology: A rapid scoping review

BACKGROUND

We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify how inclusive research teams use technology during the research process that could support remote collaboration during public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHOD

We searched three databases and conducted a hand search. Two independent reviewers screened 1498 abstracts and titles for inclusion criteria; 81 full text articles were further reviewed; 47 were included. We extracted information about each type of technology, categorised technology used during the research process, and documented described accommodations.

RESULTS

We identified 47 articles and 94 examples of technologies used by people with intellectual and developmental disabilities throughout the research process: team formation and team function (38), data collection (19), data analysis (17) and dissemination (20).

CONCLUSIONS

Technology use by team members with intellectual and developmental disabilities demonstrates promise for remote research collaborations during public health and climate emergencies and teams with members living in diverse locations.

Building a research team and selecting a research topic within the process of an inclusive research project in Spain

BACKGROUND

In this paper, we illustrate the extent to which building an inclusive research team and the selection of a research topic, based on a collaborative group approach, constitute key elements of inclusive research.

METHOD

The selection and analysis of activities and methodological strategies, extracted from the recordings of the research meetings, offer clues about the creation of collaborative and deliberative research spaces.

RESULTS

Some of the elements that reaffirm the inclusive nature of this research are as follows: contributions by all members of the research team receive equal recognition, the particular interests of all of those involved are taken into account and research strategies that are supported in different languages encourage the participation of all researchers.

CONCLUSIONS

We need to review our practices in order to identify the added value of this type of work and move towards research training proposals that promote the research ownership of people with intellectual disabilities.

"That Felt Like Real Engagement": Fostering and Maintaining Inclusive Research Collaborations With Individuals With Intellectual Disability

People with intellectual disability (ID) are increasingly involved in stakeholder-engaged research, such as "inclusive research" (IR). To understand the processes that foster and maintain IR with individuals with ID, we used a narrative interview approach with co-researchers with ID (n = 6) and academic researchers (n = 8). We analyzed the data using grounded theory principles. We then developed a model describing how contextual factors and team-level factors and processes coalesce to foster and maintain IR collaborations. We observed that team members' values and characteristics are foundational to IR and drive a commitment to accessibility. Contextual factors, including funding and partnership duration, influence teams' processes and structures. These processes and structures influence the extent to which co-researchers perceive the IR team to be cofacilitated or academic-facilitated. Co-researcher involvement is partially maintained by perceived personal and societal benefits. Optimizing the relationship between these factors may support involvement of people with ID in stakeholder-engaged research projects.

Recruiting and Retaining People With Disabilities for Qualitative Health Research: Challenges and Solutions

There are 56.7 million people with disabilities (PWD) living in the United States; yet, PWD are significantly underrepresented in health research. Even when researchers purposively seek to include PWD in studies, challenges emerge related to recruitment and retention, leading to inadequate representation and surface understandings of this population. This in turn contributes to the perpetuation of implicit and explicit health disparities that are already experienced by this population. Grounded within a qualitative, community-based participatory health research framework, we highlight challenges associated with recruiting and retaining PWD in health research, including a critical analysis of the research enterprise structure, how this disables accessible research practices for PWD, and leads to continued skepticism among PWD regarding the value of participating in research. Finally, we propose solutions to create and maintain a culture of access and inclusion as well as long-term collaborative and equity-focused partnerships.

Parents with intellectual disabilities and their perspective of peer support: "It depends on how they give it"

BACKGROUND

Parents with intellectual disabilities face particular challenges, such as lack of sufficient support with their parenting. Peers can be an important source of support for parents in the general population; however, there is a limited knowledge about peer support for parents with intellectual disabilities. The aim of this study was to explore experiences of parents with intellectual disabilities with social support with a focus on the role of peers.

METHOD

Twenty-six parents with intellectual disabilities in New South Wales, Australia, took part in a semi-structured interview.

RESULTS

The inductive content analysis of data revealed three main themes; this article reports on one of them-Developing interdependence.

CONCLUSIONS

The source of support was less important than the way support was offered. Parents valued support offered by someone who respected them as a person and parent, and was interested in what they wanted and needed.

The added value of inclusive research

BACKGROUND

The study asks when does inclusive research add value? The authors argue that this is important, given the additional time and cost of co-researching with people with intellectual disabilities. The study is situated in debates about a "second generation" of inclusive research which advocates focussing more on outcomes than process. The authors argue that this is premature, rather the authors propose that inclusive research is valuable when it helps to recognize, foster, and above all communicate the contributions people with intellectual disabilities can make.

METHOD

The authors conducted a literature review of 52 peer-reviewed journal articles about inclusive research and analysed them..

RESULTS

The authors conclude that inclusive research adds value when there is a distinctive contribution which only co-researchers with intellectual disabilities can make, when it highlights the contributions people with intellectual disabilities make, and when it contributes to better lives for the wider population of people with intellectual disabilities.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors propose a revised definition of inclusive research to replace that published by Walmsley and Johnson in 2003.

Peer-reviewed articles on inclusive research: Do co-researchers with intellectual disabilities have a voice?

BACKGROUND

Inclusive research is increasingly common in intellectual disabilities research, but ways in which voice of co-researchers with intellectual disabilities is presented remain underexplored in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

The authors conducted a literature review and analysis of peer-reviewed journal articles reporting on inclusive research. The aim was to explore the ways the voices of co-researchers with intellectual disabilities are represented in published peer-reviewed journal articles.

RESULTS

The findings indicate that there are a wide range of ways in which inclusive research projects are reported in peer-reviewed journals. However, the experiences, views and opinions of co-researchers are often either absent or very selectively reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The article concludes that although inclusive research has proliferated in the 21st century, more attention needs to be paid to the ways in which the voices of co-researchers with intellectual disabilities are heard in formal academic contexts. Guidelines for future practice are offered.

The Conundrum of Training and Capacity Building for People with Learning Disabilities Doing Research

Background

This study explores the training involved when people with learning disabilities take their place in the community as researchers. This was a theme in a recent UK seminar series where a network of researchers explored pushing the boundaries of participatory research.

Method

Academics, researchers with learning disabilities, supporters and other inclusive researchers considered important themes arising from presentations about developments in participatory research. The paper emerges from critical reflection on these rich discussions.

Results

A seminar series is a form of research training and capacity building, albeit a dynamic, interactive and collegial one. More formal training in research skills for people with learning disabilities is being developed but raises questions regarding the best contribution people with learning disabilities can make to the research process.

Conclusion

There are various models of training for inclusive research, but these need to be reciprocal if they are not to undermine the inclusive goal.