RESUMO
Public health has endorsed the use of community-based participatory research (CBPR) to address health inequities involving diverse and marginalized communities. However, few studies have examined how group diversity among members of CBPR partnerships influenced how well the partnerships achieve their goals of addressing health inequities through equitable collaboration. We conducted secondary, convergent, mixed methods analysis to (1) evaluate the association between group diversity and participatory decision-making within CBPR partnerships, and (2) identify the perceived characteristics, benefits, and challenges of group diversity within CBPR partnerships. Using data from a cross-site study of federally funded CBPR partnerships, we analyzed and integrated data from surveys of 163 partnerships (n = 448 partners) and seven in-depth case study interviews (n = 55 partners). Quantitatively, none of the measured characteristics of group diversity was associated with participatory decision-making within the partnerships. Qualitatively, we found that partnerships mainly benefited from membership differences in functional characteristics (e.g., skillset) but faced challenges from membership differences in sociocultural characteristics (e.g., gender and race). The integrated findings suggest the need to further understand how emergent group characteristics and how practices that engage in group diversity contribute to collective functioning of the partnerships. Attention to this area can help promote health equity achievements of CBPR partnerships.
Assuntos
Pesquisa Participativa Baseada na Comunidade , Equidade em Saúde , Humanos , Pesquisa Participativa Baseada na Comunidade/métodos , Promoção da Saúde , Relações Comunidade-Instituição , Saúde PúblicaRESUMO
Partnerships have become increasingly important in addressing complex global health challenges, a reality exemplified by the COVID-19 pandemic and previous infectious disease epidemics. Partnerships offer opportunities to create synergistic outcomes by capitalizing on complimentary skills, knowledge and resources. Despite the importance of understanding partnership functioning, research on collaboration is sparse and fragmented, with few conceptual frameworks applied to evaluate real-life partnerships in global health. In this study, we aimed to adapt and apply the Bergan Model of Collaborative Functioning (BMCF) to analyse partnership functioning in the UK Public Health Rapid Support Team (UK-PHRST), a government-academic partnership, dedicated to outbreak response and research in low- and middle-income countries. We conducted a literature review identifying important elements to adapt the framework, followed by a qualitative case study to characterize how each element, and the dynamics between them, influenced functioning in the UK-PHRST, exploring emerging themes to further refine the framework. Elements of the BMCF that our study reinforced as important included the partnership's mission, partner resources (skills, expertise and networks), leadership, the external environment, management systems and communication. Additional elements identified in the literature and critical to partnership functioning of the UK-PHRST included governance and financial structures adopted, trust and power balance, organizational culture, strategy and evaluation and knowledge management. Because of the way the UK-PHRST was structured, fostering team cohesion was an important indicator of synergy, alongside collaborative advantage. Dividing the funding and governance equally between organizations was considered crucial for maintaining institutional balance; however, diverse organizational cultures, weak communication practices and perceived power imbalances compromised team cohesion. Our analysis allowed us to make recommendations to improve partnership functioning at a critical time in the evolution of the UK-PHRST. The analysis approach and framework presented here can be used to evaluate and strengthen the management of global health partnerships to realize synergy.