Developing and Conducting a Dissertation Study Through the Community-Based Participatory Research Approach

Abstract

The community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach has been shown to be innovative and effective in conducting research with communities experiencing health disparities. Doctoral nursing students, and other doctoral students in the health sciences, who are interested in this approach can benefit through structured CBPR training experiences in learning how to engage with communities, build community capacity, share resources, implement CBPR study plans, and disseminate results of CBPR-focused studies. The objectives of this case-study are to demonstrate ways in which one doctoral student aligned with academic mentors and a funded CBPR project to build a relationship with the Sikh Asian Indian (AI) community of New York City to develop and implement a CBPR-focused doctoral dissertation study. The purpose of the research was to examine the relationship between the experience of perceived discrimination and health outcomes in this community. CBPR methods utilized in developing the study entailed the author partaking in formal and informal CBPR learning experiences, building relationships with community and academic partners early on through volunteering, developing a research plan in collaboration with members of the community and academic partners, identifying an appropriate setting and methods for recruitment and data collection, increasing capacity and resources for all partners (the author, community, and academic), and presenting dissertation study findings to the community. In conclusion, CBPR-focused doctoral experiences are novel pedagogical and professional approaches for nursing and health science students which can lead to mutual benefits for all involved, and ultimately successful and effective community-based health research.

Trainee-led research using an integrated knowledge translation or other research partnership approaches: a scoping review

“…The included studies were mapped onto the KTA cycle [ 29 ] based on the reported research purpose and objectives, as follows: identify problem ( n = 30) [ 37 – 67 ]; adapt knowledge to local context ( n = 34) [ 37 – 40 , 43 , 44 , 46 , 49 , 52 , 55 , 56 , 61 , 62 , 64 , 65 , 67 – 86 ]; assess barriers/facilitators to knowledge use ( n = 14) [ 39 , 40 , 52 , 56 , 63 , 68 , 72 , 74 , 81 , 83 , 87 – 90 ]; select, tailor, implement interventions ( n = 11) [ 56 , 63 , 68 , 80 , 81 , 83 , 88 – 92 ]; monitor knowledge use ( n = 25) [ 55 , 63 – 65 , 69 , 73 , 80 , 83 , 89 , 91 – 107 ]; evaluate outcomes ( n = 22) [ 48 , 50 , 51 , 62 , 64 , 68 , 71 , 79 , 83 , 91 , 93 , 95 , 100 – 110 ]; sustain knowledge use ( n = 1) [ 79 ...…”

“…Table 4 summarizes the key barrier themes identified from the included papers. Trainees’ lack of knowledge and skills posed challenges for IKT research [ 48 , 71 , 72 , 74 , 79 , 84 , 97 , 109 ]. IKT knowledge and skills were related to knowing how to apply an IKT approach and specific procedural techniques related to IKT research processes.…”

Message From the Editor in Chief

“…Nadimpalli, Van Devanter, Kayathe, and Islam (2016) share that CBPR work can be conducted with doctoral students. While CBPR is quite involved, they make a case that public health education specialists need not wait until they work several years in the field but can benefit from this experience as graduate students.…”