While citizen science is gaining attention of late, for those of us involved in community-based public health research, community/citizen involvement in research has steadily increased over the past 50 years. Community Health Workers (CHWs), also known as Promotores de Salud in the Latino community, are critical to reaching underserved populations, where health disparities are more prevalent. CHWs/Promotores provide health education and services and may also assist with the development and implementation of community- and clinic-based research studies. Recognizing that CHWs typically have no formal academic training in research design or methods, and considering that rigor in research is critical to obtaining meaningful results, we designed instruction to fill this gap. We call this educational initiative “Building Research Integrity and Capacity” or BRIC. The BRIC training consists of eight modules that can be administered as a self-paced training or incorporated into in-person, professional development geared to a specific health intervention study. While we initially designed this culturally-grounded, applied ethics training for Latino/Hispanic community research facilitators, BRIC training modules have been adapted for and tested with non-Latino novice research facilitators. This paper describes the BRIC core content and instructional design process.
Background. The community health worker (CHW) model is utilized globally to promote health and reduce health disparities in hard-to-reach and underserved communities. The model is deemed successful due to involvement of these natural helpers who are familiar with the local customs, language, and traditions. “Research” CHWs (also known as promotores) serve as cultural mediators between their community and academic researchers and are increasingly involved in the design and implementation of research; yet few of these individuals have received formal training in research methods or ethics. This study identified requisite skills and knowledge needed by research CHWs. Method. Investigators who utilized the CHW/promotor model were recruited to complete a survey and participate in one of four focus group sessions. Participants identified (1) research roles, (2) training received, (3) research competencies, (4) training barriers and facilitators, and (5) assessment preferences. Results. Participants ( n = 20) completed a survey with 19 also participating in a focus group session. All participants involved CHWs in research implementation, with nearly half involving CHWs in the study design and/or dissemination of findings phases. Critical thinking skills and application of ethical principles (e.g., demonstrating respect) were prioritized over knowledge of research infrastructure (e.g., institutional review board/ethics review process). Research ethics training designed for academic researchers was deemed inappropriate because sophisticated terminology and web-based delivery were perceived as an access barrier. Self-assessment and contextualized scenarios were recommended to assess critical thinking. Conclusions. Researchers using the CHW model should provide relevant and accessible research competency training.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.