Evaluation of a Partnership Approach to Translating Research on Breast Cancer and the Environment

Olphen, Juliana van; Ottoson, Judith M.; Green, Lawrence; Barlow, Janice; Koblick, Kathy; Hiatt, Robert A.

doi:10.1353/cpr.0.0081

Cited by 20 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2008, these guidelines were further refined and reliability was tested to develop the Reliability Tested Guidelines for Assessing Participatory Research Projects [ 13 ] as a tool to (i) help funding agencies and peer reviewers to assess the participatory nature of proposals submitted for funding as participatory research; (ii) aid evaluators in assessing the extent to which projects meet participatory research criteria; and (iii) assist researchers and intended users of the research (i.e., nonacademic partners) in strengthening the participatory nature of their project proposals and applications for funding [ 12 , 13 ]. In 2009 van Olphen et al [ 14 ] applied these guidelines for the first time, to a single project to assess to what extent their research was participatory as perceived by community, advocacy, and scientific partners. The authors concluded that this had been a very useful undertaking and that “further research should focus on the adaptation of PR principles to assist in evaluating the process and outcomes of PR [ 14 ].”…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2009 van Olphen et al [ 14 ] applied these guidelines for the first time, to a single project to assess to what extent their research was participatory as perceived by community, advocacy, and scientific partners. The authors concluded that this had been a very useful undertaking and that “further research should focus on the adaptation of PR principles to assist in evaluating the process and outcomes of PR [ 14 ].”…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Successful Strategies to Engage Research Partners for Translating Evidence into Action in Community Health: A Critical Review

Salsberg

Parry

Pluye

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. To undertake a critical review describing key strategies supporting development of participatory research (PR) teams to engage partners for creation and translation of action-oriented knowledge. Methods. Sources are four leading PR practitioners identified via bibliometric analysis. Authors' publications were identified in January 1995–October 2009 in PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Science and CAB databases, and books. Works were limited to those with a process description describing a research project and practitioners were first, second, third, or last author. Results. Adapting and applying the “Reliability Tested Guidelines for Assessing Participatory Research Projects” to retained records identified five key strategies: developing advisory committees of researchers and intended research users; developing research agreements; using formal and informal group facilitation techniques; hiring co-researchers/partners from community; and ensuring frequent communication. Other less frequently mentioned strategies were also identified. Conclusion. This review is the first time these guidelines were used to identify key strategies supporting PR projects. They proved effective at identifying and evaluating engagement strategies as reported by completed research projects. Adapting these guidelines identified gaps where the tool was unable to assess fundamental PR elements of power dynamics, equity of resources, and member turnover. Our resulting template serves as a new tool to measure partnerships.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Successful Strategies to Engage Research Partners for Translating Evidence into Action in Community Health: A Critical Review

Salsberg

Parry

Pluye

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comprehensive CBPR evaluation must include other methods such as the use of focus groups, individual interviews, ethnographic observations, and other documentation from university and community stakeholders. 25 However, development of a quantitative tool that is easy to use is important for CBPR projects that lack the resources to collect in-depth qualitative data and allows for some standardization of how CBPR is measured across projects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Asking community partners to complete the tool would allow comparison of community and academic perspectives (although Van Olphen et al had a low response rate from community partners when she asked them to complete her CBPR questionnaire). 25 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Operationalization of Community-Based Participatory Research Principles: Assessment of the National Cancer Institute's Community Network Programs

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To examine how the National Cancer Institute-funded Community Network Program (CNP) operationalized principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR). Methods Based on our review of the literature and extant CBPR measurement tools, scientists from nine of 25 CNPs developed a 27-item questionnaire to self-assess CNP operationalization of nine CBPR principles. Results Of 25 CNPs, 22 (88%) completed the questionnaire. Most scored well on CBPR principles to recognize community as a unit of identity, build on community strengths, facilitate co-learning, embrace iterative processes in developing community capacity, and achieve a balance between data generation and intervention. CNPs varied in extent to which they employed CBPR principles of addressing determinants of health, sharing power among partners, engaging community in research dissemination, and striving for sustainability. Conclusions Although tool development in this field is in its infancy, findings suggest that fidelity to CBPR processes can be assessed in a variety of settings.

show abstract

Patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research: A scoping review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: 'Patient engagement' involves meaningful collaboration between researchers and 'patient partners' to co-create research. It helps ensure that research being conducted is relevant to its ultimate end-users. Although patient engagement within clinical research has been well documented, the prevalence and effects of patient engagement in translational preclinical laboratory research remain unclear. The aim of this scoping review is to present current patient engagement activities reported in preclinical laboratory research. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and grey literature were systematically searched from inception to April 2021. Studies that described or investigated patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research were included. Patient engagement activities where patients (i.e. patients, family members, caregivers or community members) provided input, or consultation on at least one element of the research process were eligible for inclusion. Study characteristics and outcomes were extracted and organized thematically. Findings: 32 reports were included (30 primary studies, 1 narrative review, and 1 researcher guide). Most studies engaged patients at the education or priority setting stages (n=26). The most frequently reported benefit of patient engagement was 'providing a mutual learning opportunity'. Reported barriers to patient engagement reflected concerns around 'differences in knowledge and research experience' and how this may challenge communication and limit meaningful collaboration. Interpretation: Patient engagement is feasible and beneficial for preclinical laboratory research. Future work should focus on assessing the impacts of patient engagement in this area of research.

show abstract

Evaluation of a Partnership Approach to Translating Research on Breast Cancer and the Environment

Abstract: Background-The growing literature on community-based participatory research (CBPR) suggests that a participatory approach benefits science in important ways. However there have been few formal evaluations of a CBPR approach itself, and few standards developed to assist in such efforts.

Cited by 20 publications

References 17 publications

Successful Strategies to Engage Research Partners for Translating Evidence into Action in Community Health: A Critical Review

Successful Strategies to Engage Research Partners for Translating Evidence into Action in Community Health: A Critical Review

Operationalization of Community-Based Participatory Research Principles: Assessment of the National Cancer Institute's Community Network Programs

Patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research: A scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About