Comprehensive strategy for capturing and integrating community input into community research training curricula

Abstract

IntroductionCommunity stakeholders often participate in community research training curricula development. There is limited information describing how their input informs curricula. This paper describes input solicitation methods, input received, and examples of its integration.MethodsFrom June 2014 to June 2016, community members (CMs) and community-based organizations (CBOs) guided curricula development tailored for CMs and CBOs, respectively. Engagement methods included a strategic planning retreat, surveys, a listening session, workgroup meetings, and community engagement studios. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey input. For other methods, input was extracted and compiled from facilitator notes.ResultsCMs (n=37) and CBOs (n=83) providing input included patients and caregivers and advocacy, community service, and faith-based organizations, respectively. The major feedback categories were training topic priorities, format (e.g., face-to-face vs. online), logistics (e.g., training frequency), and compensation (e.g., appropriateness). Input directly guided design of CBO and CM curricula (e.g., additional time devoted to specific topics based on feedback) or helped to finalize logistics.ConclusionsMultiple quantitative and qualitative methods can be used to elicit input from community stakeholders to inform the development of community research training curricula. This input is essential for the development of training curricula that are culturally relevant and acceptable.

Collaboration and Context in the Design of Community-Engaged Research Training

“…While collaboration and community participation are highly valued in CEnR literature and practice (CTSA Consortium, 2011;Leshner et al, 2013; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Center for Advancing Translational Science, n.d.), the educational strategies best suited for combined community and university-based researcher training are only beginning to be examined (Boyer et al, 2018;Cunningham-Erves et al, 2018;Stewart, Spencer, Davis, Hart, & Boateng, 2018;Ziegahn et al, 2018). An earlier article by our team reported a descriptive study of CTSA CEnR training programs representing 30 CTSA academic medical institutions (Ziegahn et al, 2018).…”

“…Other CTSA studies on CEnR training as a vehicle to make research concepts more available to communities describe the participation of community members, practitioners, community-based organizations, and academics as trainees and codesigners (Balls-Berry et al, 2017;Battaglia, Pamphile, Bak, Spencer, & Gunn, 2019;Boyer et al, 2018;Cunningham-Erves et al, 2018;Stewart et al, 2018). Codesigners sought community input on learning formats outside of the standard academic classroom-based lecture and slide presentation formats.…”

“…Full community participation is necessary to move beyond the often superficial collaboration and participation in the design and implementation of programs aimed at eliminating disparities (Shaw-Ridley & Ridley, 2010). For example, online surveys of preferred formats and topics for training design led to development of separate curricular tracks for individuals desiring research advisory roles and to community-based organizations interested in either conducting their own research or partnering with health researchers to study community-identified health issues (Cunningham-Erves et al, 2018).…”

Community Engagement Practices at Research Centers in U.S. Minority Institutions: Priority Populations and Innovative Approaches to Advancing Health Disparities Research

“…For example, the CNPCs formed Community Advisory Boards to ensure community involvement in research and oversee the integrity of community research projects. CTSAs provide community engagement training specifically for researchers to develop their community-academic partnerships and community-engaged research [ 14 ]. Institutions may also implement activities to foster relationships and trust building with community partners, including community research training and outreach [ 13 , 14 ].…”

Engagement of community stakeholders to develop a framework to guide research dissemination to communities

“…However, a practical framework is needed that provides a stepwise, community‐guided approach to return individual research findings directly to research participants and the community‐at‐large 6 . This is important, as few studies report providing findings to communities throughout the research process 18,26,27 . Additionally, studies engaging community partners may vary in application of CBPR principles in dissemination efforts 6 .…”