Stakeholder Engagement in Late-Stage Translation Research and Implementation Science: Perspectives From the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute

Abstract

Stakeholder engagement is crucial for turning discovery into health. Although it is a highly effective approach for research in general, it is an essential component in late-stage translation research and implementation science in which the central objective is to accelerate the sustained uptake and integration of proveneffective interventions into routine clinical and public health practice. Where the stakeholder is an entire community, the term community engagement has often been used and has traditionally been defined as "the process of working collaboratively with groups of people who are affiliated by geographic proximity, special interests, or similar situations with respect to issues affecting their well-being." More recently, this definition has been expanded to specifically incorporate pre-study needs assessment, shared decision making about study themes and specific aims, data collection and analysis, interpretation and dissemination of research findings, and plans for scale-up and spread of research findings. In this article, the authors explore the scientific foundations of stakeholder engagement in biomedical research and public health practice. They highlight the strategic vision goals and objectives of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the commitment to advance dissemination and implementation research and community-engaged participatory research. The authors conclude with comments on the stakeholder engagement efforts in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Instituteefunded TREIN/Hy-TREC consortium's work published in this issue of Global Heart and their perspectives on the challenges and opportunities as we chart the future together.

The Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone (PrecISE) Asthma Network: An overview of Network organization, procedures, and interventions

“…Participant engagement is both common and de rigueur for delivery science. [14][15][16][17][18] It is less common in discovery science where the focus is on investigator-defined outcomes and mechanistic studies. In recent years, the average length of a clinical trial increased by 70% and the average number of study procedures increased by 65%, with a concomitant 21% drop in enrollment rates and a 30% drop in retention.…”

Online interviews for qualitative health research in Africa: a scoping review

“…Community engagement involves working collaboratively with local community groups to ensure the research is relevant to the local context. 38 In qualitative research, community engagement may be useful in recruiting participants, conducting a needs assessment prior to the study, gaining meaningful consent, data collection, interpretation of results and dissemination of research findings. 38 International investigators conducting online interviews in Africa must recognise community engagement as an essential component of meaningful qualitative research.…”

“… 38 In qualitative research, community engagement may be useful in recruiting participants, conducting a needs assessment prior to the study, gaining meaningful consent, data collection, interpretation of results and dissemination of research findings. 38 International investigators conducting online interviews in Africa must recognise community engagement as an essential component of meaningful qualitative research. Such community engagements may be useful in recruiting diverse samples and determining the feasibility of an online interview approach.…”

Assets for integrating task-sharing strategies for hypertension within HIV clinics: Stakeholder’s perspectives using the PEN-3 cultural model

“…Stakeholder engagement can provide insight into specific implementation factors likely to influence the integration and adoption of evidence-based task-sharing strategies for hypertension control within HIV services [ 12 , 24 – 27 ]. Not only are they key decision-makers with implementation, but their opinions may influence whether evidence-based task-sharing strategies for hypertension care are implemented or adopted within HIV services [ 27 ].…”

“…Stakeholders can expedite the implementation process, by highlighting relevant and innovative perspectives that are most efficient and may effectively move research to practice in their own settings [ 28 ]. Limited attention to stakeholders’ perspectives may lead to failed integration and adoption of evidence-based task-sharing strategies for hypertension control [ 24 ]. Despite their significance, stakeholder engagement in the integration of evidence-based task-sharing strategies for hypertension control remains incompletely understood and limited especially in Africa.…”