Using Community-Based Participatory Research to Address Social Determinants of Health: Lessons Learned From Seattle Partners for Healthy Communities

Abstract

Seattle Partners for Healthy Communities (SPHC) is a multidisciplinary collaboration of community agencies, community activists, public health professionals, academics, and health providers who conduct research aimed at improving the health of urban, socioeconomically marginalized Seattle communities. SPHC uses a community-based participatory research approach to address social factors that affect the health of these communities. This article describes three SPHC projects that focus on social determinants of health, particularly the development of social support and improving housing quality. The characteristics of community participation in each of these projects are discussed and show a spectrum of participation. Although projects successfully addressed proximal social factors affecting health, influencing more distal underlying factors was more difficult. Implications for researchers using a community-based participatory research approach and public health practitioners seeking to engage communities in addressing social determinants of health are presented.

Challenges and Facilitating Factors in Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: Lessons Learned from the Detroit, New York City and Seattle Urban Research Centers

“…[34][35][36][37][38] Sustainability depends on numerous factors that impact the formation and maintenance of CBPR partnerships for which a considerable literature exists. [14][15][16]18,19,21,22,[25][26][27][28][29] However, there is little agreement on how to define and conceptualize sustainability. Numerous terms are used in referring to program continuation, for example, Binstitutionalization,[ Bsustainability,^Bincorporation,^Broutinization,^Bcommunity ownership,^and Bcapacity building.^3 8 Several conceptual models or approaches describe theoretical perspectives, partnership attributes, and contextual factors that contribute to sustainability.…”

“…14,15,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24] This literature has contributed greatly to our understanding of the challenges and facilitating factors associated with developing CBPR partnerships. 14,[16][17][18][19]21,22,[25][26][27][28][29] In contrast, issues related to the long-term sustainability of partnerships and activities have received limited attention. [30][31][32] The purpose of this article is to examine the experiences and lessons learned from three Urban Research Centers (URCs) in Detroit, New York City, and Seattle, which were initially established in 1995 with core support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).…”

Balancing Empiricism and Local Cultural Knowledge in the Design of Prevention Research

“…18 CBPR has been used in prevention studies involving cancer risk among African Americans, 19 sexual health in college students, 20 diabetes in American Indian children, 21 indigenous populations in Ecuador, 4 families and teachers in an Early Head Start program, 22 urban health, 15 heart health, 23 traumatized immigrant children in school settings, 24 well-being in rural communities, 25 and social determinants of health. 26 CBPR has the potential to be especially useful in contexts in which cultural diversity and/or socioeconomic disparities are an issue. 27 In minority communities, for example, disseminating evidence-based practices that have been validated on samples made up largely of members of the majority culture can be problematic.…”

Re-imagining the ‘social’ in the nutrition sciences

“…Socially engaged research makes it possible to tailor existing programmes, or devise original programmes to meet local conditions and communities via a range of critical methodologies (52)(53)(54)(55) .…”