Engaged for Change: A Community-Engaged Process for Developing Interventions to Reduce Health Disparities

Abstract

The science underlying the development of individual, community, system, and policy interventions designed to reduce health disparities has lagged behind other innovations. Few models, theoretical frameworks, or processes exist to guide intervention development. Our community-engaged research partnership has been developing, implementing, and evaluating efficacious interventions to reduce HIV disparities for over 15 years. Based on our intervention research experiences, we propose a novel 13-step process designed to demystify and guide intervention development. Our intervention development process includes steps such as establishing an intervention team to manage the details of intervention development; assessing community needs, priorities, and assets; generating intervention priorities; evaluating and incorporating theory; developing a conceptual or logic model; crafting activities; honing materials; administering a pilot, noting its process, and gathering feedback from all those involved; and editing the intervention based on what was learned. Here, we outline and describe each of these 13 steps.

Preliminary Impact of the weCare Social Media Intervention to Support Health for Young Men Who Have Sex with Men and Transgender Women with HIV

“…This partnership has an established history in intervention development, implementation, and evaluation to meet the needs of traditionally marginalized populations across the HIV care continuum. 50…”

Harnessing “Scale-Up and Spread” to Support Community Uptake of the HoMBReS por un Cambio Intervention for Spanish-Speaking Men: Implementation Science Lessons Learned by a CBPR Partnership

“…Furthermore, much of the believability of the evidence supporting HoMBReS por un Cambio was attributed to a history of working together through CBPR. The WFSM team that was involved in the development of the intervention and this implementation study had been working in partnership with each of the organizations involved for over a decade and had a solid reputation based on previous successes ( Rhodes, 2012 ; Rhodes, Alonzo, et al, 2018 ; Rhodes, Duck, Alonzo, Daniel, et al, 2013 ; Rhodes et al, 2017 , 2014 , 2016 ; Rhodes, Tanner, et al, 2018 ). This history was identified as contributing to intervention uptake and implementation at each organization.…”

Evaluating Research Centers in Minority Institutions: Framework, Metrics, Best Practices, and Challenges

“…Collaborating via bimonthly videoconferences, the EWG synthesized data from workshop presentation slides and other materials prepared by each participating RCMI that included program logic models and existing evaluation frameworks. The EWG also conducted a literature review of existing evaluation frameworks and conceptual models to inform the development of the proposed evaluation model [24,25]. Further, the EWG defined components of a conceptual model.…”