2021 Community Engagement Studio Virtual Training Summit: Increasing the Diversity of Stakeholders Engaged in Research.

BACKGROUND: There are few methods that focus on engaging racial and ethnic minorities in research. The Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engaged Research Core partnered with the University of Utah, the University of Michigan, and community/patient partners to convene a virtual summit to share the Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio) model, a structured and widely-used approach that facilitates community engagement in research. OBJECTIVES: The CE Studio Virtual Training Summit (Summit) goal was to prepare multi-stakeholder (e.g., researchers, community members) research teams to engage more racial/ethnic minorities in CE studios. METHODS: Summit planning included (1) agenda development, including CE Studio training and a live CE Studio demonstration; (2) summit advertisement across several networks, including minority-serving institutions; and (3) development of pre-and post-Summit evaluations. RESULTS: Among 50 registrants (76.7% academicians) that completed evaluations, more than 65% planned to increase engagement of racial/ethnic minorities in research and implement CE Studios as a result of the Summit. Increased confidence in all CE training areas was reported, including in conducting an effective CE Studio planning meeting (32.1% pre-Summit/90.3% post-Summit) and identifying and preparing patient/community stakeholders for engagement as CE Studio experts (46.4% pre-Summit/93.6% post-Summit). CONCLUSIONS: Virtual CE Studio training that includes multi-stakeholder planning partners can be an effective method for introducing the CE Studio model and preparing multi-stakeholder research teams to engage racial and ethnic minorities in CE Studios. This is particularly salient given that effective community engaged research methods and best practices are not currently being distributed through research programs at a pace consistent with the demands.

Couple-based lifestyle intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes: protocol for a randomised pilot trial.

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes is prevalent among US adults. Lifestyle interventions that modify health behaviours prevent or delay progression to diabetes among individuals at high risk. Despite the well-documented influence of individuals' social context on their health, evidence-based type 2 diabetes prevention interventions do not systematically incorporate participants' romantic partners. Involving partners of individuals at high risk for type 2 diabetes in primary prevention may improve engagement and outcomes of programmes. The randomised pilot trial protocol described in this manuscript will evaluate a couple-based lifestyle intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes. The objective of the trial is to describe the feasibility of the couple-based intervention and the study protocol to guide planning of a definitive randomised clinical trial (RCT). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We used community-based participatory research principles to adapt an individual diabetes prevention curriculum for delivery to couples. This parallel two-arm pilot study will include 12 romantic couples in which at least one partner (ie, 'target individual') is at risk for type 2 diabetes. Couples will be randomised to either the 2021 version of the CDC's PreventT2 curriculum designed for delivery to individuals (six couples), or PreventT2 Together, the adapted couple-based curriculum (six couples). Participants and interventionists will be unblinded, but research nurses collecting data will be blinded to treatment allocation. Feasibility of the couple-based intervention and the study protocol will be assessed using both quantitative and qualitative measures. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the University of Utah IRB (#143079). Findings will be shared with researchers through publications and presentations. We will collaborate with community partners to determine the optimal strategy for communicating findings to community members. Results will inform a subsequent definitive RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05695170.

Electronic informed consent information for residual newborn specimen research: findings from focus groups with diverse populations.

We developed a video and an app for obtaining consent about allowing newborn blood spots (NBS) to be used as biospecimen resources for biobanking. Newborn screening programs test for treatable diseases and leave residual biospecimens that can be used in future research activities. We conducted focus groups and interviews with three diverse communities to determine (a) how well the consent tools worked and (b) participant familiarity with NBS. Participants preferred the video and noted that they were unaware that NBS could be used for future research. Providing information about how biospecimens could be used was a key issue.

Ethical and public health implications of genetic testing for suicide risk: family and survivor perspectives.

PURPOSE: Death from suicide has an estimated heritability of ~50%. Research may soon allow calculation of polygenic risk scores (PRS) for suicide death, which could be marketed directly to consumers. This raises ethical concerns. Understanding how consumers will utilize this information is urgent. METHODS: We conducted three focus groups involving suicide attempt survivors ("survivors") and family members of suicide decedents ("family members") to gauge their reactions to this technology. Questions focused on positive and negative implications of PRS results. Qualitative research methods were used to summarize studio results. RESULTS: Eight survivors and 13 family members participated. Both groups postulated benefits of suicide PRS, including prevention and reduced stigma. Their concerns ranged from increased stigma to adverse psychological effects. They suggested that suicide PRS should be accompanied by extensive education and counseling. Participants experienced no adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Many ethical, legal, and social implications of genetic testing for suicide risk are highly salient to community stakeholders. Our participants hoped that suicide PRS could have significant individual and community-level benefits, but had concerns about effects in several domains, including stigma, access to insurance and employment, and increased anxiety and depression.