A 10-Year Systematic Review of Photovoice Projects With Youth in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Photovoice is a method used in community-based participatory research that places cameras in the hands of people and invites them to record their lives, engage in critical dialogue, and advocate for changes needed in their communities. This article presents a review of the literature from 2010 to 2019 on photovoice projects implemented with U.S. youth informed by an emancipatory research conceptual framework. METHOD: Information on 30 project elements was extracted from each of the 47 publications, representing 39 unique projects that met our inclusion criteria. Projects were also assessed for whether they met the goals of photovoice as originally conceptualized by Wang and Burris in 1997. RESULTS: Participants, policy makers, and community members were affected by photovoice projects. Outcomes ranged from researcher specific needs to community change and policy awareness and changes. Common outcomes included (1) gaining knowledge, (2) participant empowerment, (3) community change/action, (4) new partnerships, and (5) reaching policy makers. Of the 39 unique projects, 17 addressed all three photovoice goals, 12 addressed two, and 10 addressed only one. All the projects met the goal of enabling participants to record and reflect their community's strengths and concerns. Twenty-four were aligned with all three principles of emancipatory research. DISCUSSION: Photovoice is a valuable, flexible tool that can enable participants to play an active, guiding role in assessing the needs and assets of their community. Through critical reflection and dialogue, youth can become change agents in their communities. No single set of strategies will work best for every project.

Community advisory boards: Experiences and common practices of clinical and translational science award programs.

Community advisory boards (CABs) are a valuable strategy for engaging and partnering with communities in research. Eighty-nine percent of Clinical and Translational Science Awardees (CTSA) responding to a 2011 survey reported having a CAB. CTSAs' experiences with CABs are valuable for informing future practice. This study was conducted to describe common CAB implementation practices among CTSAs; document perceived benefits, challenges, and contributions; and examine their progress toward desirable outcomes. A cross-CTSA collaborative team collected survey data from respondents representing academic and/or community members affiliated with CTSAs with CABs. Data representing 44 CTSAs with CABs were analyzed using descriptive statistics. A majority of respondents reported practices reflecting respect for CAB members' expertise and input such as compensation (75%), advisory purview beyond their CTSA's Community Engagement program (88%), and influence over CAB operations. Three-quarters provide members with orientation and training on roles and responsibilities and 89% reported evaluating their CAB. Almost all respondents indicated their CTSA incorporates the feedback of their CABs to some degree; over half do so a lot or completely. This study profiles practices that inform CTSAs implementing a CAB and provide an evaluative benchmark for those with existing CABs.

Developing and Piloting a Community Scientist Academy to Engage Communities and Patients in Research.

INTRODUCTION: Effective translational research requires engagement and collaboration between communities, researchers, and practitioners. We describe a community scientist academy (CSA) developed at the suggestion of our CTSA's community advisory board to engage and capacitate community members by 1) increasing community members' and patients' understanding about the research process and 2) increasing their access to opportunities to influence and participate in research. A joint CTSA/community planning committee developed this 8-hour workshop including sessions on: 1) research definitions and processes; 2) study design; 3) study implementation; and 4) ways to get involved in research. The workshop format includes interactive exercises, content slides and videos, and researcher and community presenters. METHODS: Community-based information sessions allowed assessment of community interest before piloting. Two pilots of the CSA were conducted with community members and patients. Participant data and a pre/post knowledge and feedback survey provides evaluation data. RESULTS: The pilot included 24 diverse participants, over half of whom had not previously participated in research. Evaluation data suggest knowledge gains. Post- CSA, one third have reviewed CTSA pilot grants and over 80% want to attend further training. CONCLUSIONS: The CSA can demystify the research process for those underrepresented in research and facilitate their engagement and influence within CTSAs.