Community advisory boards as implementation strategies to center partner and patient voice in community health centers.

IF 2.1 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Pub Date : 2024-12-18 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1017/cts.2024.679
Rebekka M Lee, Kamini Mallick, James G Daly, Vetta Sanders Thompson, Elise Hoffman, Maria Papadopoulos, Stacey Curry
{"title":"Community advisory boards as implementation strategies to center partner and patient voice in community health centers.","authors":"Rebekka M Lee, Kamini Mallick, James G Daly, Vetta Sanders Thompson, Elise Hoffman, Maria Papadopoulos, Stacey Curry","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Community advisory boards (CABs) are a promising approach for strengthening patient and partner voices in community health center (CHC) evidence-based decision-making. This paper aims to describe how CHCs used CABs during the COVID-19 pandemic to improve the reach of testing among populations experiencing health disparities and identify transferable lessons for future implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This mixed methods study integrates brief quantitative surveys of community engagement (<i>N</i> = 20) and one-on-one qualitative interviews (<i>N</i> = 13) of staff and community partners engaged in CHC CABs with a cost analysis and qualitative feedback from CHC staff participating in an online learning community (<i>N</i> = 17).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community partners and staff engaged in the CHC CABs reported high ratings of engagement, with all mean ratings of community engagement principles above a 4 (\"very good\" or \"often\") out of 5. Qualitative findings provided a more in-depth understanding of experiences serving on the CHC CAB and highlighted how engagement principles such as trust and mutual respect were reflected in CAB practices. We developed a CHC CAB toolkit with strategies for governance and prioritization, cost estimates to ensure sustainment, guidance on integrating quality improvement expertise, testimonies from community members on the benefits of joining, and template agendas and facilitator training to ensure meeting success.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In alignment with the Translational Science Benefits Model, this study expands research impact through comprehensive mixed methods measurement of community engagement and by transforming findings into an action-orientated guide for CHCs to implement CABs to guide evidence-based decision-making for community and public health impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795859/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.679","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Community advisory boards (CABs) are a promising approach for strengthening patient and partner voices in community health center (CHC) evidence-based decision-making. This paper aims to describe how CHCs used CABs during the COVID-19 pandemic to improve the reach of testing among populations experiencing health disparities and identify transferable lessons for future implementation.

Methods: This mixed methods study integrates brief quantitative surveys of community engagement (N = 20) and one-on-one qualitative interviews (N = 13) of staff and community partners engaged in CHC CABs with a cost analysis and qualitative feedback from CHC staff participating in an online learning community (N = 17).

Results: Community partners and staff engaged in the CHC CABs reported high ratings of engagement, with all mean ratings of community engagement principles above a 4 ("very good" or "often") out of 5. Qualitative findings provided a more in-depth understanding of experiences serving on the CHC CAB and highlighted how engagement principles such as trust and mutual respect were reflected in CAB practices. We developed a CHC CAB toolkit with strategies for governance and prioritization, cost estimates to ensure sustainment, guidance on integrating quality improvement expertise, testimonies from community members on the benefits of joining, and template agendas and facilitator training to ensure meeting success.

Conclusion: In alignment with the Translational Science Benefits Model, this study expands research impact through comprehensive mixed methods measurement of community engagement and by transforming findings into an action-orientated guide for CHCs to implement CABs to guide evidence-based decision-making for community and public health impact.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
26.90%
发文量
437
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Using technology to increase reach and optimize consent experience for a large-scale research program. Engaging stakeholders to strengthen support for community-engaged research at Stanford School of Medicine: An institutional assessment and action planning approach. A maturity model for Clinical Trials Management Ecosystem. Bioethical and critical consciousness in clinical translational neuroscience. Collaborating with and enabling diverse communities to address health inequities: The experiences of a community engagement and outreach team.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1