Community-based participatory research to engage disadvantaged communities: Levels of engagement reached and how to increase it. A systematic review.

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is one of the most used community engagement frameworks to promote health changes in vulnerable populations. The more a community is engaged, the more a program can impact the social determinants of health. The present study aims to measure the level of engagement reached in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using CBPR in disadvantaged populations, and to find out the CBPR components that better correlate with a higher level of engagement. A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane and Scopus databases were queried. Engagement level was assessed using the revised version of IAP2 spectrum, ranging from "inform" to "shared leadership" . Fifty-one RCTs were included, belonging to 36 engagement programs. Fourteen CBPR reached the highest level of engagement. According to the multivariate logistic regression, a pre-existing community intervention was associated with a higher engagement level (OR = 10.08; p<0.05). The variable "institutional funding" was perfectly correlated with a higher level of engagement. No correlation was found with income status or type of preventive programs. A history of collaboration seems to influence the effectiveness in involving communities burdened with social inequities, so starting new partnerships remains a public health priority to invest on. A strong potentiality of CBPR was described in engaging disadvantaged communities, addressing social determinants of health. The key findings described above should be taken into account when planning a community engagement intervention, to build up an effective collaborative field between researchers and population.

Knowledge, Attitudes Toward, and Acceptability of Genetic Modification among Western Balkan University Students of Life Sciences (AGREE Study).

BACKGROUND: There are still no data on the attitudes and acceptance of genetic modification (GM) food in European developing countries, such as the Western Balkan countries. The aim of the study was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and acceptance of GM but also to shed light on the multifactorial process leading to acceptance of genetic modifications among Western Balkan students of life sciences. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the final study population sample was composed of 1251 university students. The instrument for data collection was a questionnaire consisting of 49 items composed of 5 sections taken from the literature. Attitudes toward GM were analyzed by using Q-mode factor analysis and principal component analysis was run for the assessment of perception of personal health risks. The acceptability of GM was analyzed in binary probit models assessing the acceptability of GM products in different areas of application with Q models, sociodemographic variables, perception of personal health risks factors, respondents' knowledge about biotechnology, gender, and age as explanatory variables. RESULTS: This study demonstrated that students of life sciences supported the implementation of GM in industry and medicine production but not in food production. Their acceptance was most influenced by 3 out of 5 attitude models that were identified (p < 0.0001). Regarding the perception of personal health risks, the factor "credence risks" was seen as a negative predictor of acceptance of GM in industry and food production (p < 0.05). The main knowledge predictor of rejecting GM was misconception, whereas real knowledge had no impact (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The AGREE study provided the first rough picture of the knowledge, attitudes, and acceptance of GM in this area. Given the target population, it could be expected that the general population's acceptance of all observed elements, especially knowledge, would be lower.

[Level of job satisfaction among employees working at healthcare facilities in Nisava and Toplica district].

INTRODUCTION: The product of health system and its employees is health service whose quality is related to the satisfaction and motivation of people working in health system. The objective of this study was to assess and compare satisfaction with different aspects of work among different categories of employees in healthcare facilities on primary, secondary and tertiary level of health care in Nisava and Toplica districts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted as a one-day study in 15 healthcare facilities on primary level, in two public hospitals and 27 clinics of Clinical Centre of Nis, using anonymous questionnaire. Out of 3,892 employees, who took part in this study, 2,227 were from primary and 1,665 were from secondary and tertiary level. RESULTS: All employees on primary level are more satisfied with the majority of aspects of job comparing with employees on secondary and tertiary level of health care. Administrative staff is in general more satisfied with all aspects of job comparing with other categories of employees. All employees on secondary and tertiary level are more physically and psychically exhausted than employees on primary level of health care. Health workers on secondary and tertiary level are most psychically exhausted. CONCLUSION: There is a difference in satisfaction with different aspects ofjob in different categories of employees, and on different levels of health, in healthcare facilities in Nisava and Toplica districts. Employees of healthcare facilities on primary level of health care are in general more satisfied than employees on se-condary and tertiary level of health care.