Action Learning Cohort Series: An Innovative Community-Engaged Approach for Translating Research Into Practice.

Cultivating strong partnerships among community and academic stakeholders expedites the translation of research findings into practice and communities by enhancing opportunities for research dissemination and implementation. However, the lack of systematic methods for community stakeholder engagement may decelerate the translational research process. The North Carolina Translational Research and Clinical Sciences Institute implemented an innovative approach to community engagement called the Action Learning Cohort (ALC) Series. The ALC Series, a workgroup extension of a professional conference, used action learning and systems thinking strategies to conceptualize and develop a product aimed at preventing, treating, and controlling hypertension in eastern North Carolina. We evaluated the acceptability and practicality of the ALC Series using survey, focus group, and interview pilot data. Action learning and systems thinking strategies led ALC stakeholders to develop and disseminate The Empathy Building Resource Guide: A Toolkit for Enhancing Patient-Provider Relationships in the Treatment, Management, and Prevention of Hypertension. Stakeholders rated the Series as satisfactory and acknowledged gains in knowledge and desire for engagement with fellow ALC stakeholders beyond the Series. The ALC Series approach is a potentially practical and acceptable model for systematically engaging community stakeholders in translating knowledge into a product that addresses health topics like hypertension.

Aligning community-engaged research competencies with online training resources across the Clinical and Translational Science Award Consortium.

INTRODUCTION: The extent to which Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) programs offer publicly accessible online resources for training in community-engaged research (CEnR) core competencies is unknown. This study cataloged publicly accessible online CEnR resources from CTSAs and mapped resources to CEnR core competency domains. METHODS: Following a search and review of the current literature regarding CEnR competencies, CEnR core competency domains were identified and defined. A systematic review of publicly accessible online CEnR resources from all 64 current CTSAs was conducted between July 2018 and May 2019. Resource content was independently reviewed by two reviewers and scored for the inclusion of each CEnR core competency domain. Domain scores across all resources were assessed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Eight CEnR core competency domains were identified. Overall, 214 CEnR resources publicly accessible online from 35 CTSAs were eligible for review. Scoring discrepancies for at least one domain within a resource initially occurred in 51% of resources. "CEnR methods" (50.5%) and "Knowledge and relationships with communities" (40.2%) were the most frequently addressed domains, while "CEnR program evaluation" (12.1%) and "Dissemination and advocacy" (11.2%) were the least frequently addressed domains. Additionally, challenges were noted in navigating CTSA websites to access CEnR resources, and CEnR competency nomenclature was not standardized. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings guide CEnR stakeholders to identify publicly accessible online resources and gaps to address in CEnR resource development. Standardized nomenclature for CEnR competency is needed for effective CEnR resource classification. Uniform organization of CTSA websites may maximize navigability.