Antiracism and Community-Based Participatory Research: Synergies, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Structural racism causes stark health inequities and operates at every level of society, including the academic and governmental entities that support health research and practice. We argue that health research institutions must invest in research that actively disrupts racial hierarchies, with leadership from racially marginalized communities and scholars. We highlight synergies between antiracist principles and community-based participatory research (CBPR), examine the potential for CBPR to promote antiracist research and praxis, illustrate structural barriers to antiracist CBPR praxis, and offer examples of CBPR actions taken to disrupt structural racism. We make recommendations for the next generation of antiracist CBPR, including modify health research funding to center the priorities of racially marginalized communities, support sustained commitments and accountability to those communities by funders and research institutions, distribute research funds equitably across community and academic institutions, amplify antiracist praxis through translation of research to policy, and adopt institutional practices that support reflection and adaptation of CBPR to align with emergent community priorities and antiracist practices. A critical application of CBPR principles offers pathways to transforming institutional practices that reproduce and reinforce racial inequities. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(1):70-78. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307114).

Can everyone hear me? Reflections on the use of global online workshops for promoting inclusive knowledge generation.

Online research methods have risen in popularity over recent decades, particularly in the wake of COVID-19. We conducted five online workshops capturing the experiences of participatory health researchers in relation to power, as part of a collaborative project to develop global knowledge systems on power in participatory health research. These workshops included predominantly academic researchers working in 24 countries across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas. Here, we reflect on the opportunities, limitations, and key considerations of using online workshops for knowledge generation and shared learning. The online workshop approach offers the potential for cross-continental knowledge exchange and for the amplification of global South voices. However, this study highlights the need for deeper exploration of power dynamics exposed by online platform use, particularly the 'digital divide' between academic partners and community co-researchers. Further research is needed to better understand the role of online platforms in generating more inclusive knowledge systems.

Exploring theoretical mechanisms of community-engaged research: a multilevel cross-sectional national study of structural and relational practices in community-academic partnerships.

BACKGROUND: Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) is often used to address health inequities due to structural racism. However, much of the existing literature emphasizes relationships and synergy rather than structural components of CBPR. This study introduces and tests new theoretical mechanisms of the CBPR Conceptual Model to address this limitation. METHODS: Three-stage online cross-sectional survey administered from 2016 to 2018 with 165 community-engaged research projects identified through federal databases or training grants. Participants (N = 453) were principal investigators and project team members (both academic and community partners) who provided project-level details and perceived contexts, processes, and outcomes. Data were analyzed through structural equation modeling and fuzzy-set qualitative comparison analysis. RESULTS: Commitment to Collective Empowerment was a key mediating variable between context and intervention activities. Synergy and Community Engagement in Research Actions were mediating variables between context/partnership process and outcomes. Collective Empowerment was most strongly aligned with Synergy, while higher levels of Structural Governance and lower levels of Relationships were most consistent with higher Community Engagement in Research Actions. CONCLUSIONS: The CBPR Conceptual Model identifies key theoretical mechanisms for explaining health equity and health outcomes in community-academic partnerships. The scholarly literature's preoccupation with synergy and relationships overlooks two promising practices-Structural Governance and Collective Empowerment-that interact from contexts through mechanisms to influence outcomes. These results also expand expectations beyond a "one size fits all" for reliably producing positive outcomes.

Trends in Controlled Vocabulary and Health Equity.

Medical librarians collaborate with physicians and other healthcare professionals to improve the quality and accessibility of medical information, which includes assembling the best evidence to advance health equality through teaching and research. This column brings together brief cases highlighting the experiences and perspectives of medical librarians, educators, and healthcare professionals using their organizational, pedagogical, and information-analysis skills to advance health equality indexing.

Community sharing: Contextualizing Western research notions of contamination within an Indigenous research paradigm.

Báa nnilah is a chronic illness self-management program designed by and for the Apsáalooke (Crow) community. Arising from a collaboration between an Indigenous nonprofit organization and a university-based research team, Báa nnilah's development, implementation, and evaluation have been influenced by both Indigenous and Western research paradigms (WRPs). Báa nnilah was evaluated using a randomized wait-list control group design. In a WRP, contamination, or intervention information shared by the intervention group with the control group, is actively discouraged as it makes ascertaining causality difficult, if not impossible. This approach is not consonant with Apsáalooke cultural values that include the encouragement of sharing helpful information with others, supporting an Indigenous research paradigm's (IRP) goal of benefiting the community. The purpose of this paper is to address contamination and sharing as an area of tension between WRP and IRP. We describe how the concepts of contamination and sharing within Báa nnilah's implementation and evaluation are interpreted differently when viewed from these contrasting paradigms, and set forth a call for greater exploration of Indigenous research approaches for developing, implementing, and evaluating intervention programs in Indigenous communities. (Improving Chronic Illness Management with the Apsáalooke Nation: The Báa nnilah Project.: NCT03036189), ClinicalTrials. gov: NCT03036189).

Engage for Equity: Advancing the Fields of Community-Based Participatory Research and Community-engaged Research in Community Psychology and the Social Sciences.

Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR), as the most cited Community-Engaged Research (CEnR) approach in the health fields, mirrors community-psychology's long-term interest in participatory action research and community empowerment. This article introduces the Engage for Equity study, a long-term National Institutes of Health-funded inquiry to identify best partnering and collaborative practices that contribute to community capacity, empowerment and policy outcomes, and to long-term improved health and health equity. Four articles present facets of the study: psychometrics of partnering process and outcome measures, measures and outcomes of shared governance, and description of the CBPR Model as a new equity- and partnership based implementation framework; and as a tool for organizational learning and quality improvement. Finally a review of CBPR and CEnR in psychology offers recommendations for the field. Though focusing on CBPR and CEnR, Engage for Equity offers lessons for all forms of participatory action research.

Practicing Hope: Enhancing Empowerment in Primary Health Care through Community-based Participatory Research.

The World Health Organization's (WHO's) Declaration of Alma Ata in 1978 made Primary Health Care (PHC) the official health policy of all WHO member countries, stressing the importance of multisectoral collaboration and community empowerment as critical for delivering quality primary healthcare and public health services to achieve social justice and health equity. Over forty years later, a divide remains between seeing individual patients in the traditional biomedical model and addressing population-level social determinants of health. One promising approach for the intentional and active integration of multi-sectoral partnering practices and community empowerment into Primary Health Care is the use of community-based participatory research (CBPR). The power of CBPR lies in its systematic approach to facilitating equitable collaboration of partners based on community priorities and strengths and is increasingly recognized for improving health equity outcomes. This paper highlights the use of CBPR as a promising practice for healthcare organizations to bridge the gap between the traditional individual patient focus and the comprehensive primary healthcare approach from WHO. We use a narrative case study from A Ministry of Sharing (AMOS) Health and Hope, a PHC organization in Nicaragua, to illustrate the use of the CBPR model as an implementation framework that facilitated the transformation of structures, policies, and practices as AMOS created multi-sector partnerships and embraced community empowerment as part of its strategic and comprehensive approach to health equity.

CBPR Implementation Framework for Community-Academic Partnerships.

The Engage for Equity (E2) study is an intervention trial for community-academic research partnerships that seeks to improve partnering practices and health equity outcomes by providing community and academic partners with tools to enhance and advance power sharing and health equity. Twenty-five community/academic research teams completed a two-day training intervention where they were introduced to the CBPR Conceptual Model and corresponding applied tools to their partnerships. We report on team interviews conducted immediately after the training, where teams discussed opportunities and challenges using the CBPR Model as an implementation framework as they considered their own contexts, their partnering processes/practices, actions, and their desired outcomes. We applied Diffusion of Innovation theory to guide data collection and analysis; augmented by intent to use and collective reflection. Results pointed to the flexibility of the CBPR model, concrete use of tools (e.g., planning/evaluation), and broader use in inspiring collective reflection to improve partnering practices and inform equity values. As an implementation framework, the CBPR model incorporates collaborative processes and strategies to mitigate power differentials into key phases of implementation studies, adding factors central to health equity work, not existing in previous implementation frameworks.

Structural Community Governance: Importance for Community-Academic Research Partnerships.

Community based participatory research (CBPR) emphasizes democratic knowledge production and joint action between academics and communities to promote health equity through multilevel interventions. While much scholarship has expressed a commitment to collaboration between researchers and communities, effective methods of structural governance between community and academic stakeholders is under explored. We fill this gap by presenting a conceptual and empirical analysis describing multiple dimensions of structural governance in CBPR partnerships. First, we integrate public policy evidence on effective collaborative governance designs with the emerging literature in CBPR to create a conceptual model. Next, we utilize internet surveys of 179 federally funded community engaged research projects to construct and assess a measure of structural governance across multiple dimensions using confirmatory factor analysis. We explore whether antecedent factors such as the stage of the partnership and ethnic composition are associated with these dimensions and we examine associations for each of these components on positive perceptions of community involvement of research and collective empowerment. We develop a robust multidimensional measure of structural governance that is positively associated with perceptions of increased community involvement in research and collective empowerment.

Scales of Practices and Outcomes for Community-Engaged Research.

Despite the growth of research on community-engaged research (CEnR), recent reviews suggest there has been limited development of validated scales to measure key contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes, impairing testing and refinement of theoretical models. The purpose of this study is to present the psychometric properties of scales from the Engage for Equity (E2) project, stemming from a long-term research partnership examining community-engaged research projects. This study used a three-stage, cross-sectional format: (a) a sampling frame of 413 CEnR projects was identified; (b) 210 principal investigators completed a project-level survey and nominated partners for another survey; (c) 457 investigators and partners completed a survey about project contexts, processes, interventions, and outcomes. Factorial validity was established through confirmatory factor analysis supporting seven scales: contextual capacity, commitment to collective empowerment, relationships, community engagement in research actions, synergy, partner and partnership transformation, and projected outcomes. Convergent validity was established through examining covariances among the scales. This study largely yielded results consistent with a previous psychometric study of related measures, while demonstrating improved ceiling effects of the items and refined conceptualization of core theoretical constructs.