Process and outcome constructs for evaluating community-based participatory research projects: a matrix of existing measures

University of Central Florida, Nicholson School of Communication, Orlando, FL 32816, USA.
Health Education Research (Impact Factor: 1.66). 09/2011; 27(4):680-90. DOI: 10.1093/her/cyr087
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been widely used in public health research in the last decade as an approach to develop culturally centered interventions and collaborative research processes in which communities are directly involved in the construction and implementation of these interventions and in other application of findings. Little is known, however, about CBPR pathways of change and how these academic-community collaborations may contribute to successful outcomes. A new health CBPR conceptual model (Wallerstein N, Oetzel JG, Duran B et al. CBPR: What predicts outcomes? In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N (eds). Communication Based Participatory Research, 2nd edn. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Co., 2008) suggests that relationships between four components: context, group dynamics, the extent of community-centeredness in intervention and/or research design and the impact of these participatory processes on CBPR system change and health outcomes. This article seeks to identify instruments and measures in a comprehensive literature review that relates to these distinct components of the CBPR model and to present them in an organized and indexed format for researcher use. Specifically, 258 articles were identified in a review of CBPR (and related) literature from 2002 to 2008. Based on this review and from recommendations of a national advisory board, 46 CBPR instruments were identified and each was reviewed and coded using the CBPR logic model. The 46 instruments yielded 224 individual measures of characteristics in the CBPR model. While this study does not investigate the quality of the instruments, it does provide information about reliability and validity for specific measures. Group dynamics proved to have the largest number of identified measures, while context and CBPR system and health outcomes had the least. Consistent with other summaries of instruments, such as Granner and Sharpe's inventory (Granner ML, Sharpe PA. Evaluating community coalition characteristics and functioning: a summary of measurement tools. Health Educ Res 2004; 19: 514-32), validity and reliability information were often lacking, and one or both were only available for 65 of the 224 measures. This summary of measures provides a place to start for new and continuing partnerships seeking to evaluate their progress.

Download full-text


Available from: Marjorie K. Leimomi Mala Mau, Mar 10, 2014
1 Follower
45 Reads
  • Source
    • "The potential for partners to enhance the process and outcomes of research by being involved in selecting methods has been reported in the broader PR literature. More specifically, the participation of partners in methods selection has been reported to increase the validity of a study by increasing the depth and variety of data collected, establishing congruence between a research question and a local reality, and adapting study methodology to specific contexts (Macaulay et al., 1999; Sandoval et al., 2012; Viswanathan et al., 2004). A second theme identified was the limited reporting of the depth of the partners' involvement across studies, including a lack of clarity on how multiple perspectives (researchers and partners) were integrated into the decision-making process. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Participatory research aims to increase the relevance and broaden the implementation of health research by involving those affected by the outcomes of health studies. Few studies within the field of neurodevelopmental disorders, particularly autism spectrum disorders, have involved autistic individuals as partners. This study sought to identify and characterize published participatory research partnerships between researchers and individuals with autism spectrum disorder or other neurodevelopmental disorders and examine the influence of participatory research partnerships on the research process and reported study outcomes. A search of databases and review of gray literature identified seven studies that described participatory research partnerships between academic researchers and individuals with autism spectrum disorder or other neurodevelopmental disorders. A comparative analysis of the studies revealed two key themes: (1) variations in the participatory research design and (2) limitations during the reporting of the depth of the partner's involvement. Both themes potentially limit the application and generalizability of the findings. The results of the review are discussed in relation to the use of evaluative frameworks for such participatory research studies to determine the potential benefits of participatory research partnerships within the neurodevelopmental and autism spectrum disorder populations.
    Autism 07/2014; 18(7). DOI:10.1177/1362361314539858 · 3.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    01/2012; National Academies Press., ISBN: 0-309-26354-9
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Community mobilization and collaboration among diverse partners are vital components of the effort to reduce and eliminate cancer disparities in the United States. We studied the development and impact of intersectoral connections among the members of the Massachusetts Community Network for Cancer Education, Research, and Training (MassCONECT). As one of the Community Network Program sites funded by the National Cancer Institute, this infrastructure-building initiative utilized principles of Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) to unite community coalitions, researchers, policymakers, and other important stakeholders to address cancer disparities in three Massachusetts communities: Boston, Lawrence, and Worcester. We conducted a cross-sectional, sociometric network analysis four years after the network was formed. A total of 38 of 55 members participated in the study (69% response rate). Over four years of collaboration, the number of intersectoral connections reported by members (intersectoral out-degree) increased, as did the extent to which such connections were reported reciprocally (intersectoral reciprocity). We assessed relationships between these markers of intersectoral collaboration and three intermediate outcomes in the effort to reduce and eliminate cancer disparities: delivery of community activities, policy engagement, and grants/publications. We found a positive and statistically significant relationship between intersectoral out-degree and community activities and policy engagement (the relationship was borderline significant for grants/publications). We found a positive and statistically significant relationship between intersectoral reciprocity and community activities and grants/publications (the relationship was borderline significant for policy engagement). The study suggests that intersectoral connections may be important drivers of diverse intermediate outcomes in the effort to reduce and eliminate cancer disparities. The findings support investment in infrastructure-building and intersectoral mobilization in addressing disparities and highlight the benefits of using CBPR approaches for such work.
    PLoS ONE 02/2012; 7(2):e32130. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0032130 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Show more