Sampling and Recruiting Community-Based Programs Using Community-Partnered Participation Research

Stockdale, Susan; Tang, Lingqi; Pudilo, Esmeralda; Lucas-Wright, Anna; Chung, Bowen; Horta, Mariana; Masongsong, Zoe; Jones, Felica; Belin, Thomas R.; Sherbourne, Cathy D.; Wells, Kenneth B.

doi:10.1177/1524839915605059

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Site visits post-randomization to confirm eligibility and finalize enrollment were conducted by staff blinded to assignment: 20 programs were ineligible, 18 refused, and 95 programs from 50 consenting agencies enrolled (46 RS, 49 CEP). Participating and nonparticipating programs were comparable in neighborhood demographics by zip code-level census tract data (each p>.10) (8, 16). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Community-Partnered, Participatory, Cluster-Randomized Study of Depression Care Quality Improvement: Three-Year Outcomes

Ong

Jones

Aoki

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE For implementing quality improvement programs for depression in underserved communities, a multi-sector coalition approach (Community-Engagement and Planning, CEP) was more effective than program technical assistance (Resources for Services, RS) in improving mental health-related quality of life (MHRQL), reducing behavioral health hospitalizations and shifting services toward community-based programs at 6-months. At 12-months there was continued evidence of improvement. This study objective was to evaluate for continued evidence of improvement at 3-years. METHOD Three-year extension study for Community Partners in Care (CPIC), a community-partnered cluster-randomized trial with 93 Los Angeles health and community programs assigned to CEP or RS having 1004 enrolled depressed clients eligible for 3-year follow-up and 600 completing surveys from 89 programs. Multiple regression analyses with multiple imputation controlling for baseline status and covariates are used to estimate intervention effects on poor MHRQL and depression; physical health-related quality of life (PHRQL) and behavioral health hospital nights; and healthcare, community program and medication use. RESULTS CEP versus RS did not affect 3-year depression or MHRQL but had modest effects on improving PHRQL and reducing behavioral health hospital nights; and increased having any social-community sector visit for depression and use of mood stabilizers. Sensitivity analyses with longitudinal modeling reproduced findings, but for differences between intervention groups in change from baseline to 3-years, effects were not significant. CONCLUSIONS At 3-years, CEP versus RS did not affect primary mental health outcomes but had modest effects on improving PHRQL and reducing behavioral hospital nights.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Community-Partnered, Participatory, Cluster-Randomized Study of Depression Care Quality Improvement: Three-Year Outcomes

Ong

Jones

Aoki

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other groups have begun to report some successes with similar approaches, such as the “community-partnered participation approach” reported by Stockdale and colleagues, which was built on long-standing relationships between academic and community partners [44]. In addition, there has been at least one other deliberate effort to “hybridize” CBPR and randomized community trials in order to promote translation and uptake of study findings [24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coproduction of Research Questions and Research Evidence in Public Health: The Study to Prevent Teen Drinking Parties

Wolfson

Wagoner

Rhodes

et al. 2017

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) provides a set of principles and practices intended to foster coproduction of knowledge. However, CBPR often has shortcomings when applied to population-level policy and practice interventions, including a focus on single communities and a lack of focus on policy change. At the same time, community trials focused on policy have shortcomings, including lack of stakeholder involvement in framing research questions and modest engagement in study implementation and interpretation and dissemination of results. We describe an attempt to hybridize CBPR and community trials by creating a partnership that included a national membership organization, a coalition advisory board, intervention and delayed intervention communities, and an academic study team, which collaborated on a study of community strategies to prevent underage drinking parties. We use qualitative and quantitative data to critically assess the partnership. Areas where the partnership was effective included (1) identifying a research question with high public health significance, (2) enhancing the intervention, and (3) improving research methods. Challenges included community coalition representatives' greater focus on their own communities rather than the production of broader scientific knowledge. This model can be applied in future attempts to narrow the gap between research, policy, and practice.

show abstract

“…CEP programs received the same resources within a multi-sector coalition approach to co-leading, implementing, and monitoring multisector depression services (e.g., encouraging community programs to be active in psychoeducation and screening, with streamlined referrals to clinics and social services) (19). CPIC's community-partnered participatory research approach and development of community partnerships are described in detail in several articles (19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24).…”

Section: Multi-sector Collaborative Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Community Interventions to Promote Mental Health and Social Equity

Castillo¹,

Ijadi-Maghsoodi²,

Shadravan³

et al. 2020

FOC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We review recent community interventions to promote mental health and social equity. We define community interventions as those that involve multi-sector partnerships, emphasize community members as integral to the intervention, and/or deliver services in community settings. We examine literature in seven topic areas: collaborative care, early psychosis, school-based interventions, homelessness, criminal justice, global mental health, and mental health promotion/prevention. We adapt the social-ecological model for health promotion and provide a framework for understanding the actions of community interventions.Recent Findings: There are recent examples of effective interventions in each topic area. The majority of interventions focus on individual, family/interpersonal, and program/ institutional social-ecological levels, with few intervening on whole communities or involving multiple non-healthcare sectors. Findings from many studies reinforce the interplay among mental health, interpersonal relationships, and social determinants of health.Summary: There is evidence for the effectiveness of community interventions for improving mental health and some social outcomes across social-ecological levels. Studies indicate the importance of ongoing resources and training to maintain long-term outcomes, explicit attention to ethics and processes to foster equitable partnerships, and policy reform to support sustainable healthcarecommunity collaborations.

show abstract

Sampling and Recruiting Community-Based Programs Using Community-Partnered Participation Research

Cited by 11 publications

References 31 publications

A Community-Partnered, Participatory, Cluster-Randomized Study of Depression Care Quality Improvement: Three-Year Outcomes

A Community-Partnered, Participatory, Cluster-Randomized Study of Depression Care Quality Improvement: Three-Year Outcomes

Coproduction of Research Questions and Research Evidence in Public Health: The Study to Prevent Teen Drinking Parties

Community Interventions to Promote Mental Health and Social Equity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About