Growing a Community-Academic Partnership: Lessons Learned in Forming a Qualitative Interview Team for the Community Partners in Care Study

By engaging, partnering, and building trust with community members, research on vulnerable populations may offer opportunities to improve population health in communities that suffer from health disparities. While the literature on participatory and partnered approaches offers techniques and strategies for forming community-academic partnerships, less information is available about how partnerships can grow and evolve over time. In this article, we describe the expansion of a long-standing partnership that uses principles of community partnered participatory research (CPPR), a variant of community-based participatory research (CBPR). We outline the preparation and executive phases of conducting qualitative interviewing with highly vulnerable study participants who have already been participants in a longitudinal survey. We describe the challenges and concerns at each phase of the research and summarize some lessons learned. To grow and evolve, the partnership must constantly be reaffirmed in the experiences of new members.

Community Partners in Care: 6- and 12-month Outcomes of Community Engagement versus Technical Assistance to Implement Depression Collaborative Care among Depressed Older Adults

Objective

Community Partners in Care, a community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial with depressed clients from 95 Los Angeles health and community programs, examined the added value of a community coalition approach (Community Engagement and Planning [CEP]) versus individual program technical assistance (Resources for Services [RS]) to implement depression collaborative care in underserved communities. This exploratory subanalysis examines 6- and 12-month outcomes among CPIC participants aged >50 years.

Design

Community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial conducted between April 2010 and March 2012.

Setting

Hollywood-Metropolitan (HM) and South Los Angeles (SLA) Service Planning Areas (SPAs), Los Angeles, California.

Participants

394 participants aged >50 years with depressive symptoms (8-item Patient Health Questionnaire score ≥ 10).

Intervention

A community-partnered multi-sector coalition approach (Community Engagement and Planning [CEP]) vs individual program technical assistance (Resources for Services [RS]) to implement depression collaborative care.

Main Outcome Measures

Depressive symptoms (PHQ-8 score), mental health-related quality of life (MHRQL), community-prioritized outcomes including mental wellness, homelessness risk and physical activity, and services utilization.

Results

At 6 months, CEP was more effective than RS at improving MHRQL and mental wellness among participants aged >50 years; no differences were found in the effects of CEP vs RS on other outcomes. No significant outcome differences between CEP and RS were found at 12 months.

Conclusions

A multisector community coalition approach may offer additional benefits over individual program technical assistance to improve outcomes among depressed adults aged >50 years living in underserved communities.

Editorial: Advances in Community Partnered Participatory Research

Ethn Dis. 2018;28(Suppl 2):285-286; doi:10.18865/ed.28.S2.285.

Editorial: Developments in Community Partnered Participatory Research for Behavioral Health

Ethn Dis. 2018;28(Suppl 2): 287-290; doi:10.18865/ed.28.S2.287.

Creating Safe Spaces: A Community Health Worker-Academic Partnered Approach to Addressing Intimate Partner Violence

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a persistent public health problem in the United States, with an estimated one in three women experiencing rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner within her lifetime. Non-Hispanic Black women disproportionately experience IPV, but there has been limited success in implementing culturally appropriate prevention programs and services for members of this population. Community health workers (CHWs) are trusted members of under-resourced communities who provide reliable health information and improve the cultural appropriateness of service delivery and may be a vital resource for developing new IPV interventions. Guided by the principles of community partnered participatory research, we developed the CHW-led Safe Spaces project, which aimed to establish a strong academic-community partnership to focus on issues related to experiences of IPV and the prevention of IPV in New Orleans. In this article, we describe the development of our partnership including the formation of an advisory board, creation of a broad-based stakeholder coalition, offering a community partnered participatory research training, conducting IPV education and outreach, and establishing a research agenda. Our processes are replicable and lessons learned may be relevant to other groups seeking to address IPV by leveraging the strengths of community-academic collaborations and CHWs.

Lessons on Patient and Stakeholder Engagement Strategies for Pipeline to Proposal Awards

The Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) supports patient-centered clinical comparative effectiveness research (CER) including health disparities and engagement portfolios. In 2013, PCORI launched the Pipeline to Proposal (P2P) mechanism to support development of novel patient- and stakeholder-centered partnerships focused on designing clinical CER funding proposals. By providing a tiered structure of successive small contracts and technical assistance, the P2P mechanism encourages development of new research partnerships among diverse stakeholders. As a comparatively new field, patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) has few well-delineated methods for engaging patients and other non-scientists in effective teams with academics or clinicians to develop and implement rigorous, scientific research proposals. Community partnered participatory research (CPPR) provides a useful framework for structuring new partnerships. In this article we highlight the origins, development, and prospects of three current examples of funded P2P initiatives based in New Orleans and Los Angeles. We outline how these projects - Prisoner to Patient, the NOLA Partnership, and Resilience Among African American Men - use CPPR principles. We also describe how they have collaborated with, and contributed to, a two-way learning and knowledge exchange among members of the PCORI-funded Community and Patient Partnered Research Network. Lessons learned may be applicable to other groups planning to create new partnerships focused on implementing PCOR.

Participatory Technology Development to Enhance Community Resilience

Objective

To assess the feasibility of a novel, partnered technology development process to co-create mobile health applications (apps) addressing community health priorities, using psychoeducation of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) principles for enhancing resilience as an example.

Design

Stakeholder engagement, workgroups, pilot feasibility study using mixed methods during October 2013 through January 2016 over three phases: 1) defining the vision of the project and increasing technical capacity, 2) co-development and pilot testing of the app, and 3) planning for sustainability.

Setting

An academic-community partnership in South Los Angeles, California.

Participants

Eight stakeholders; 30 pilot participants from the community.

Main Outcome Measures

Qualitative analysis of audio-recordings of the app development process and stakeholder interviews, surveys of stakeholders' perception of the development process, app use data, and feedback from pilot participants.

Results

The participatory technology development process resulted in creation and pilot-testing of a resiliency-focused text messaging app. Of the 1,107 messages sent, 23 out of 30 (77%) app users responded to explore interactive content. Stakeholders reported increased perceived competency in creating mobile apps and that the process fostered a culture of co-leadership. There was also sustained engagement in mobile app development by stakeholders beyond the initial project period.

Conclusions

This is the first study, to our knowledge, to demonstrate the feasibility of participatory technology development, an approach involving direct participation in the development, tailoring and maintenance of a mobile app by a broad set of stakeholders with high representation from racial/ethnic minorities from an under-resourced community. Participatory technology development is a promising approach for creating sustainable, relevant and engaging health technologies across different technological, clinical and community settings.

Strategies to Build Trust and Recruit African American and Latino Community Residents for Health Research: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

This study used Community Partnered Participatory Research (CPPR) to address low participation of racial and ethnic minorities in medical research and the lack of trust between underrepresented communities and researchers.

METHODS

Using a community and academic partnership in July 2012, residents of a South Los Angeles neighborhood were exposed to research recruitment strategies: referral by word-of-mouth, community agencies, direct marketing, and extant study participants.

RESULTS

Among 258 community members exposed to recruitment strategies, 79.8% completed the study. Exposed individuals identified their most important method for learning about the study as referral by study participants (39.8%), community agencies (30.6%), word-of-mouth (17.5%), or direct marketing promotion (12.1%). Study completion rates varied by recruitment method: referral by community agencies (88.7%), referral by participants (80.4%), direct marketing promotion (86.2%), word of mouth (64.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although African American and Latino communities are often described as difficult to engage in research, we found high levels of research participation and completion when recruitment strategies emerged from the community itself. This suggests recruitment strategies based on CPPR principles represent an important opportunity for addressing health disparities and our high rates of research completion should provide optimism and a road map for next steps.