Community Priority Index: Utility, Applicability and Validation for Priority Setting in Community-Based Participatory Research

Examining the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Remote Training on Community-Based Participatory Research: Single-Arm Pre-Post Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, a growing body of scientific evidence has demonstrated that community engagement in research leads to more relevant research, enhances the uptake of research findings, and improves clinical outcomes. Despite the increasing need for the integration of community engagement methodologies into the scientific inquiry, doctoral and master's level competencies in the field of psychiatry often lack dedicated training or coursework on community engagement methodologies.

OBJECTIVE

A total of 13 service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists (with specialties ranging from basic science to implementation science) aged 18 and older participated in remote training on community-based participatory research. Data were collected at baseline, 2 days, and 3 months.

METHODS

A total of 13 service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists (with specialties ranging from basic science to implementation science) aged 18 and older participated in remote training on community-based participatory research. Data were collected at baseline, 2 days, and 3 months.

RESULTS

The pilot study demonstrated that a 3-month remote training on community-based participatory research ("Partnership Academy") was deemed feasible and acceptable by service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists. Improvements were found in research engagement and the quality of partnership. A marked increase in distrust in the medical system was also found. Groups submitted 4 grant applications and published 1 peer-reviewed journal at a 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This pre- and postpilot study demonstrated it is possible to train groups of service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists in community-based participatory research. These findings provide preliminary evidence that a 3-month remote training on community-based participatory research ("Partnership Academy") is feasible, acceptable, and potentially associated with improvements in research engagement as well as the quality of partnership and output, such as manuscripts and grant applications.

Peer and Non-Peer Academic Scientists and Peer Support Specialist Community of Practice: Stakeholder Engagement to Advance the Science of Peer Support

Community of Practice, a community-engagement method that encourages a group of people to interact regularly towards a common goal, may promote satisfying experiences in patient-outcomes research among marginalized populations. Peer support specialists are increasingly being involved in peer-informed mental health research due to their lived experiences of mental illness and are an asset in co-designing healthcare programs along with researchers. In 2015, ten scientists and ten mental health service users joined as a Community of Practice that trained to engage in patient-centered outcomes research. The group has so far has presented at 20 conferences, published three book chapters and 30 peer-reviewed publications, and developed two smartphone applications. Of note are the co-production of a smartphone application, a digital peer support certification program, an app decision support tool, and an instrument to assess the value of patient-research partnerships. Future research will assess the feasibility of incorporating more stakeholders to enhance research outcomes.

Using a community-based participatory research approach to meaningfully engage those with lived experience of diabetes and homelessness

INTRODUCTION

Participatory research is a study method that engages patients in research programs, ideally from study design through to dissemination. It is not commonly used in diabetes health services research. Our objectives were to describe the process and challenges of conducting a participatory research project and to highlight the experiences of both patient co-researchers and academic researchers.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We recruited people with lived experience of homelessness (PWLEH) and diabetes in Toronto, Canada to become patient co-researchers. They were asked to commit to attending biweekly meetings. We undertook two major research projects: concept mapping to choose a research focus; and photovoice to explore accessing healthy food while homeless. We used a convergent mixed-methods design to evaluate their experience.

RESULTS

A diverse group of eight PWLEH had an average attendance of 82% over 21 meetings-despite this success, we encountered a number of challenges of conducting this research: funding, ethics approval and recruitment were particularly difficult. Group members reported that participation improved their ability to self-advocate in their diabetes care and provided them with tangible skills and social benefits. Group members stated that they valued being involved in all aspects of the research, in particular knowledge translation activities, including advocating for nutritious food at shelters; presenting to stakeholders; and meeting with policymakers.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of participatory research methods enables academic researchers to support community members in pursuing research that is pertinent to them and which has a positive impact. In our study, co-researchers contributed in meaningful ways and also valued the experience.

A Participatory Action Research Approach to Mental Health Interventions among Corrections Officers: Standardizing Priorities and Maintaining Design Autonomy

A central dilemma in Participatory Action Research (PAR) is to establish participant decision authority on interventions while adhering to rigorous research practices. We faced this dilemma as part of an ongoing multi-site field research project in the corrections sector, where semi-autonomous union-based Design Teams (DTs) address worker health issues and design interventions. Employee focus groups and surveys elicited areas of concern, pointing to four topics in particular: overtime and sleep, work-family balance, physical fitness, and mental health; these were later expanded to eight priority areas. Quantitative rankings were generated by focus groups of line-level employees and supervisors. A multi-level, iterative priority selection process averaged focus group ratings of topic importance and also difficulty to address separately. Areas of job stress and mental health had highest importance but were also considered most difficult to address. A labor-management steering committee reviewed and endorsed the rankings and transmitted these to newly formed DTs. In principle, each DT was free to establish a different topic for initial intervention but they all chose the most important and difficult to address topics. This structured multi-tiered participatory process preserved ownership by all parties. Balancing participant autonomy and efficient prioritization of topics among multiple interest groups in this PAR effort met research methods needs and also made it easier for DTs to focus on the difficult and stigmatized area of mental health in the correctional workforce.

Socio-Cultural Values of Ecosystem Services from Oak Forests in the Eastern Himalaya

Identification and assessment of socio-cultural values of ecosystem services are increasingly important for the planning and management of forest resources. Key information necessary is how different forest user groups perceive and prioritize different ecosystem services based on their local setting. We assessed the socio-cultural values of ecosystem services of high-altitude oak forests in Western Bhutan using participatory approaches with two important forest users: local communities and forest experts. We found that these forests serve as a pool of 22 ecosystem services under four MEA categories of provisioning (9), regulating (8), supporting (2), and cultural (3) services. Fresh water was unanimously identified as the most valuable service, as well as the most vulnerable, by both the groups. The priorities of local communities inclined towards provisioning and cultural services due to their dependence on these services for their livelihood and wellbeing. Forest experts’ priorities were more evenly spread over three categories of services: provisioning, regulating, and supporting services, reflecting their broader interest in resource management, biodiversity conservation, and climate change mitigation. Several regulating and supporting services were not easily identified by many villagers, suggesting that bridging the priorities of local interests with broader national forestry goals may require public partnerships and integrated decision-making about the entire suite of ecosystem services. Several management interventions proposed by the groups were presented for consideration by local users, scientists, and policy makers. For all ongoing and future ecosystem service assessments, we recommend the integration of socio-cultural values with biophysical and monetary assessments to fully value the benefits from the high-altitude oak forests.