Community-based participatory research with Indigenous communities: The proximity paradox

Best Practices for Effective Clinical Partnerships with Indigenous Populations of North America (American Indian, Alaska Native, First Nations, Métis, and Inuit)

“…11,12 Trust is also easier to establish if the outside partner is able to spend physical time with members of the community in order to become known in the community, and to learn the local politics, culture, and issues important to people in the community. 11,[13][14][15][16] Having a presence in the community also allows people a chance to know who the clinician or researcher is as a person, which can contribute to increased trust from the community. 17,18 Another component of relationship building is the consideration of tribal leadership in clinical and research matters.…”

“…Along with communication with tribal leadership, communication with the community through regular presence, responsiveness to community requests, and learning to communicate within the cultural norms of that tribe are all the responsibility of Haozous & Neher clinicians and researchers. 14,[20][21][22] When working in or with an indigenous population, trusted clinicians can become part of the fabric of the community, and may be invited to ceremonial or community events. Malone 23 describes the phenomenon of boundary crossings, in which the clinician has established a trusting relationship, and remains aware of his or her role in the community to avoid crossing professional boundaries by going Native and inadvertently committing ethical violations.…”

Wâhkôhtowin: The Governance of Good Community–Academic Research Relationships to Improve the Health and Well-Being of Children in Alexander First Nation

“…Indeed, the high level of engagement with the ARC has been made possible by both the relatively short travel time between the University of Alberta and AFN, as well as the continuous funding that brought resources to the projects and the community. CBPR practices are easier to implement when researchers are near a community with which collaborative relationships can be developed and sustained (Ritchie et al, 2013). For these reasons, it is important to consider contextual factors that may influence the sustainability and impact of a community research committee.…”

“…For these reasons, it is important to consider contextual factors that may influence the sustainability and impact of a community research committee. Ultimately, CBPR projects must reflect the place, circumstances, and proximity of the collaborating partners (Ritchie et al, 2013).…”

Developing a context appropriate clinical guideline for post-operative pain management in Ghana: A participatory approach

“…The participatory process employed ensured that relevant stakeholders were actively involved and their views incorporated in the clinical guideline developed. Participatory processes have been adopted by community-based projects and this approach has been demonstrated to be effective (Kraemer Diaz, Spears Johnson, & Arcury, 2013;Ritchie et al, 2013). The approach has been employed successfully for promoting environmental health (Liu et al, 2011).…”