Researcher perspectives on embedding community stakeholders in T1–T2 research: A potential new model for full-spectrum translational research

Abstract

Effective community engagement in T3–T4 research is widespread, however, similar stakeholder involvement is missing in T1–T2 research. As part of an effort to embed community stakeholders in T1–T2 research, an academic community partnered team conducted discussion groups with researchers to assess perspectives on (1) barriers/challenges to including community stakeholders in basic science, (2) skills/training required for stakeholders and researchers, and (3) potential benefits of these activities. Engaging community in basic science research was perceived as challenging but with exciting potential to incorporate “real-life” community health priorities into basic research, resulting in a new full-spectrum translational research model.

Integrating dissemination and implementation sciences within Clinical and Translational Science Award programs to advance translational research: Recommendations to national and local leaders

“…Enhancing translational scientist's training in D&I sciences should benefit research regardless of the translational research stage (T0 to T4). Specific D&I competencies that are relevant for all research stages include understanding whom to engage as stakeholders in research and how, why, and when to engage them to improve the applicability of research findings, understanding how and why to utilize pragmatic, novel, and efficient study designs and measures, and understanding how to critique the literature with attention to feasibility for translation and impact [2,[20][21][22].…”

A framework for building comprehensive cancer center’s capacity for bidirectional engagement

“…There are additional benefits for researchers engaging with the community, as identified in other research studies. This includes early researchers being trained in community engagement, increasing scientists’ ability to communicate with community members creating sustainable partnerships, and ensuring the equitable impact of their research [ 3 – 5 ]. Additionally, community engagement can provide research motivation, inform the full research process, increase the uptake of findings, support the development of dissemination plans for grants, and assist with securing additional funding [ 3 , 5 , 6 ].…”

“…This includes early researchers being trained in community engagement, increasing scientists’ ability to communicate with community members creating sustainable partnerships, and ensuring the equitable impact of their research [ 3 – 5 ]. Additionally, community engagement can provide research motivation, inform the full research process, increase the uptake of findings, support the development of dissemination plans for grants, and assist with securing additional funding [ 3 , 5 , 6 ]. Bi-directional community engagement is also benefiting for community members, including providing opportunities for informing science and its dissemination, reducing mistrust, and increasing capacity [ 3 ].…”

“…Additionally, community engagement can provide research motivation, inform the full research process, increase the uptake of findings, support the development of dissemination plans for grants, and assist with securing additional funding [ 3 , 5 , 6 ]. Bi-directional community engagement is also benefiting for community members, including providing opportunities for informing science and its dissemination, reducing mistrust, and increasing capacity [ 3 ].…”

“…While research has shown that basic scientists engage with the community less than other researchers [ 1 ], there are also barriers that impact scientists at all levels of the cancer research continuum [ 8 , 9 ]. These barriers include identifying partners [ 3 ], lack of trust [ 3 ], competing priorities and time needed for engagement [ 3 , 8 , 9 ], as well as institutional fiscal and administrative barriers [ 3 , 8 , 9 ].…”