Community-Engaged Qualitative Scholarship During a Pandemic: Problems, Perils and Lessons Learned

Abstract

Keywordscommunity based research, methods in qualitative inquiry, par-participatory action research, action research, case study COVID-19 has changed the way we plan, conduct, and disseminate research (Else, 2020). In this editorial, we use case examples to discuss the challenges that COVID-19 has raised for community-based-participatory qualitative research and pose potential solutions. Although we are hopeful for the end of the pandemic, unanticipated lessons learned during COVID-19 are widely applicable for scholarship in the present as well as for future crises.Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a collaborative research approach that involves all partners and stakeholders in the research process. For instance, CBPR focuses on research topics that are raised by, and important to, the community. The goals of CBPR are two-fold: (1) to generate knowledge and (2) achieve social change to improve health outcomes (University of Michigan School of Public Health, n.d.). CBPR goes by different names in different fields and disciplines-such as action research, citizen science, community engaged research, or participatory action research, among others (Wallerstein, 2020). Regardless of its label, this work is united by a focus on collaboration, taking initiative, and ultimately, social justice (Wallerstein, 2020).Any method-quantitative or qualitative, can be used in a CBPR approach. Yet, given CBPR's focus on rich and nuanced understandings of community and stakeholder needs, qualitative methods are particularly well-suited for CBPR approaches and, consequently, are most used (e.g., interviews, focus groups, photovoice, etc.) in CBPR projects (Clark & Ventres, 2016). As Clarke and Ventres noted: Qualitative, community-based participatory research is about diving into communities, recognizing and valuing those with whom we work, and bringing our creative and engaging selves into waters of exploration and understanding . . . up from such collaborative milieus can arise research leading to thoughtful and efficacious outcomes.

A Virtual, Multi-Session Workshop Model for Integrating Patient and Public Perspectives in Research Analysis and Interpretation

“…In addition, our explicit description of technological competencies, features of the virtual platform, and timepoints for virtual contact make our model more accessible for researchers who are have limited familiarity with conducting their work online. While some scholars have suggested that virtual methods for participatory research are not a substitute for in-person methods (Goldstein et al, 2020; Teti et al, 2021), this notion may be explained by a lack of familiarity and evidence for the conduct of qualitative research online, as opposed to the approach being inherently inferior. More research is needed on the patient and public experience of virtual engagement.…”

Cultivating Psychological Resilience of Israeli Medical Directors of COVID-19 Divisions: The Dynamic Spheres of Salutogenics

“…We faced acknowledged challenges of data collection in qualitative research during a health crisis and were unable to conduct face-to-face interviews ( 31 ). Our responsibility as qualitative researchers, however, was to study the lived experiences of front-line clinicians upon the outbreak of the crisis rather than retrospectively.…”

Fieldwork without the field: Navigating qualitative research in pandemic times

“…Scheduled interviews were often missed and then rescheduled, sometimes repeatedly, to accommodate the inherently challenging nature of participating in virtual interviews while working in the vineyard during harvest season. Participating in a research project, or co-managing it, requires time and energy that participants in times of crisis and uncertainty may not have (Teti et al, 2021); being sensitive to this issue as researchers is part of an ethical relationship in which participants and researchers share power and foreground flexibility.…”

“…Nevertheless, by enacting caution and respect, Collins' restraint was an ethical act, performing the prevention of contamination even to the detriment of the data. Echoing Teti et al (2021), her sensitivity to the obtrusiveness of virtual methods for certain populations acknowledged how building trust and relationships is key to CBPR methods and how CBPR is often compromised in pandemic times by necessary social distancing.…”