Ethics and Community Involvement in Syntheses Concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian Health: A Systematic Review

Gribble, Matthew O.; Him, Deana M. Around

doi:10.1080/21507716.2013.848956

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 147 publications

(80 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gribble & Around Him ( 67 ) identified the level of reporting on ethics and community involvement across 107 meta-analyses or systematic reviews among American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian populations. Less than 10% reported on any approval process, i.e., seeking community input, or working with tribal institutional review boards or governments.…”

Section: Intervention and Research Processes Domainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partnerships, Processes, and Outcomes: A Health Equity–Focused Scoping Meta-Review of Community-Engaged Scholarship

Ortiz

Nash

Shea

et al. 2020

Annu. Rev. Public Health

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, there has been remarkable growth in scholarship examining the usefulness of community-engaged research (CEnR) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) for eliminating health inequities.This article seeks to synthesize the extant literature of systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and other related reviews regarding the context, processes, and research designs and interventions underlying CEnR that optimize its effectiveness. Through a scoping review, we have utilized an empirically derived framework of CBPR to map this literature and identify key findings and priorities for future research. Our study found 100 reviews of CEnR that largely support the CBPR conceptual framework.

show abstract

Section: Intervention and Research Processes Domainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partnerships, Processes, and Outcomes: A Health Equity–Focused Scoping Meta-Review of Community-Engaged Scholarship

Ortiz

Nash

Shea

et al. 2020

Annu. Rev. Public Health

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, Structural Governance helps to steward the project to ensure community members are engaged in the research and that there is a focus on community benefit [ 22 ]. Native communities have been leaders in this area with a strong focus on formal governance of CEnR projects through institutional review boards and formal approval processes during governmental meetings [ 37 , 38 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring theoretical mechanisms of community-engaged research: a multilevel cross-sectional national study of structural and relational practices in community-academic partnerships

Oetzel

Boursaw

Magarati

et al. 2022

Int J Equity Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) is often used to address health inequities due to structural racism. However, much of the existing literature emphasizes relationships and synergy rather than structural components of CBPR. This study introduces and tests new theoretical mechanisms of the CBPR Conceptual Model to address this limitation. Methods Three-stage online cross-sectional survey administered from 2016 to 2018 with 165 community-engaged research projects identified through federal databases or training grants. Participants (N = 453) were principal investigators and project team members (both academic and community partners) who provided project-level details and perceived contexts, processes, and outcomes. Data were analyzed through structural equation modeling and fuzzy-set qualitative comparison analysis. Results Commitment to Collective Empowerment was a key mediating variable between context and intervention activities. Synergy and Community Engagement in Research Actions were mediating variables between context/partnership process and outcomes. Collective Empowerment was most strongly aligned with Synergy, while higher levels of Structural Governance and lower levels of Relationships were most consistent with higher Community Engagement in Research Actions. Conclusions The CBPR Conceptual Model identifies key theoretical mechanisms for explaining health equity and health outcomes in community-academic partnerships. The scholarly literature’s preoccupation with synergy and relationships overlooks two promising practices—Structural Governance and Collective Empowerment—that interact from contexts through mechanisms to influence outcomes. These results also expand expectations beyond a “one size fits all” for reliably producing positive outcomes.

show abstract

“…We recognize some of the concerns regarding ethics statements in AIAN research by providing additional information on our positionality and approach to conducting ethical AIAN research (Gribble and Around Him, 2014). The authors declare that research ethics approval was not required for this study.…”

Section: Ethical Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous research ethics and Tribal Research Review Boards in the United States: examining online presence and themes across online documentation

Kuhn,

Vendiola

et al. 2024

Research Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers seeking to engage in projects related to Tribal communities and their citizens, lands, and non-human relatives are responsible for understanding and abiding by each Tribal nation’s research laws and review processes. Few studies, however, have described the many diverse forms of Tribal research review systems across the United States (US). This study provides one of the most comprehensive examinations of research review processes administered by Tribal Research Review Boards (TRRBs) in the US. Through a systematic analysis, we consider TRRBs’ online presence, online documentation, and themes across documents, for five entity types: Tribal nations and Tribal consortiums, Tribal colleges and universities, Tribal health organizations, Indian Health Services, and other Tribal organizations. Results include an assessment of online presence for 98 potential TRRBs, identification of 118 publicly available online documents, and analysis of 41 themes across four document types: Tribal research codes and TRRBs’ guidelines, applications, and post-approval documents. Altogether, this research provides a macro-level analysis of the most common types of TRRBs in the US in an effort to increase researchers’ understanding of these important processes as they prepare to ethically engage Tribal communities in research. These results aim to empower Tribal decision makers as they align their TRRBs’ online visibility and documentation with community priorities and strengthen their protections for the rights and wellbeing of their citizens and community. Ultimately, by expanding our knowledge of TRRBs across the US, this contribution seeks to uphold Tribal sovereignty in research and promote ethical approaches to research with Indigenous communities.

show abstract

Ethics and Community Involvement in Syntheses Concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian Health: A Systematic Review

Cited by 9 publications

References 147 publications

Partnerships, Processes, and Outcomes: A Health Equity–Focused Scoping Meta-Review of Community-Engaged Scholarship

Partnerships, Processes, and Outcomes: A Health Equity–Focused Scoping Meta-Review of Community-Engaged Scholarship

Exploring theoretical mechanisms of community-engaged research: a multilevel cross-sectional national study of structural and relational practices in community-academic partnerships

Indigenous research ethics and Tribal Research Review Boards in the United States: examining online presence and themes across online documentation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About