What Lies Beneath?社区参与在将 COVID-19 研究成果转化为政策制定者中的作用。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES International Journal of Health Policy and Management Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-20 DOI:10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8249
Bronwen Merner, Sophie Hill, Freya Saich, Ariane Virgona, Defeng Jin, Alisa Pedrana, Coral Keren, Rachel Kar Yee Chung, Deborah Osborne, Anna Lee Wilkinson, Alison Coelho, Lisa Gibbs, Katherine B Gibney, Margaret Hellard, Dean Lusher, Rebecca Ryan
{"title":"What Lies Beneath?社区参与在将 COVID-19 研究成果转化为政策制定者中的作用。","authors":"Bronwen Merner, Sophie Hill, Freya Saich, Ariane Virgona, Defeng Jin, Alisa Pedrana, Coral Keren, Rachel Kar Yee Chung, Deborah Osborne, Anna Lee Wilkinson, Alison Coelho, Lisa Gibbs, Katherine B Gibney, Margaret Hellard, Dean Lusher, Rebecca Ryan","doi":"10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Community engagement is key to developing local and context-specific strategies for the prevention and control of COVID-19. However, expedited research design and approval in the early days of the pandemic may have limited the opportunities for community members to influence pandemic-related research. In this study, we sought to understand how a Community Engagement Group (CEG) could impact a large longitudinal COVID-19 research project (Optimise), when involved solely in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of the research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven community members were recruited for the CEG, representing a diverse range of groups. Each month, Optimise data of topical importance were compiled into a draft report. The CEG discussed the draft report at their monthly meeting and members' contributions were incorporated into the final report for distribution to policy-makers. In this study, a document analysis was undertaken of ten consecutive reports produced between February and November 2021. Each report was compared pre- and post- the inclusion of CEG contributions, which were then analysed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community engagement in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of Optimise had positive impacts on reports for policy-makers, including grounding the empirical findings in broader community perspectives, identifying policy issues affecting different groups and contributing unique insights beyond the empirical findings. Overall, the CEG contributions demonstrated the complexity of lived experience lying beneath the empirical data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Community engagement in the translation of the Optimise findings resulted in research reports to policy-makers that were reflective of a broader range of community perspectives, and that provided potential solutions to emerging policy issues related to COVID-19. This study adds to the evidence base about the impact of community engagement in the later interpretation and knowledge translation phases of research, particularly in the context of reporting to policy-makers during a public health emergency.</p>","PeriodicalId":14135,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Policy and Management","volume":"13 ","pages":"8249"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11270602/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Lies Beneath? The Role of Community Engagement in Translating COVID-19 Research Findings to Policy-Makers.\",\"authors\":\"Bronwen Merner, Sophie Hill, Freya Saich, Ariane Virgona, Defeng Jin, Alisa Pedrana, Coral Keren, Rachel Kar Yee Chung, Deborah Osborne, Anna Lee Wilkinson, Alison Coelho, Lisa Gibbs, Katherine B Gibney, Margaret Hellard, Dean Lusher, Rebecca Ryan\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Community engagement is key to developing local and context-specific strategies for the prevention and control of COVID-19. However, expedited research design and approval in the early days of the pandemic may have limited the opportunities for community members to influence pandemic-related research. In this study, we sought to understand how a Community Engagement Group (CEG) could impact a large longitudinal COVID-19 research project (Optimise), when involved solely in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of the research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven community members were recruited for the CEG, representing a diverse range of groups. Each month, Optimise data of topical importance were compiled into a draft report. The CEG discussed the draft report at their monthly meeting and members' contributions were incorporated into the final report for distribution to policy-makers. In this study, a document analysis was undertaken of ten consecutive reports produced between February and November 2021. Each report was compared pre- and post- the inclusion of CEG contributions, which were then analysed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community engagement in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of Optimise had positive impacts on reports for policy-makers, including grounding the empirical findings in broader community perspectives, identifying policy issues affecting different groups and contributing unique insights beyond the empirical findings. Overall, the CEG contributions demonstrated the complexity of lived experience lying beneath the empirical data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Community engagement in the translation of the Optimise findings resulted in research reports to policy-makers that were reflective of a broader range of community perspectives, and that provided potential solutions to emerging policy issues related to COVID-19. This study adds to the evidence base about the impact of community engagement in the later interpretation and knowledge translation phases of research, particularly in the context of reporting to policy-makers during a public health emergency.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14135,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Health Policy and Management\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"8249\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11270602/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Health Policy and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8249\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Policy and Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8249","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:社区参与是制定针对当地具体情况的 COVID-19 预防和控制策略的关键。然而,在大流行初期,研究设计和审批的加快可能限制了社区成员影响大流行相关研究的机会。在本研究中,我们试图了解社区参与小组(CEG)在仅参与研究的解释和知识转化阶段时,如何影响大型 COVID-19 纵向研究项目(Optimise):方法:为 CEG 招募了七名社区成员,他们代表了不同的群体。每个月,Optimise 的重要专题数据都会汇编成一份报告草案。社区专家小组在月度会议上讨论报告草案,并将成员的意见纳入最终报告,以分发给政策制定者。本研究对 2021 年 2 月至 11 月间连续编写的十份报告进行了文件分析。每份报告都在纳入社区专家小组贡献前后进行了比较,然后使用主题分析法对其进行了分析:结果:社区参与 "优化 "项目的解释和知识转化阶段,对决策者报告产生了积极影响,包括将实证研究结果建立在更广泛的社区视角基础上,确定影响不同群体的政策问题,以及提出实证研究结果之外的独特见解。总之,社区专家小组的贡献展示了隐藏在经验数据背后的生活经验的复杂性:社区参与 "优化 "研究成果的转化,为政策制定者提供了反映更广泛社区观点的研究报告,并为与 COVID-19 相关的新政策问题提供了潜在的解决方案。这项研究为社区参与研究后期解释和知识转化阶段的影响提供了更多证据,尤其是在公共卫生突发事件期间向政策制定者提交报告的背景下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
What Lies Beneath? The Role of Community Engagement in Translating COVID-19 Research Findings to Policy-Makers.

Background: Community engagement is key to developing local and context-specific strategies for the prevention and control of COVID-19. However, expedited research design and approval in the early days of the pandemic may have limited the opportunities for community members to influence pandemic-related research. In this study, we sought to understand how a Community Engagement Group (CEG) could impact a large longitudinal COVID-19 research project (Optimise), when involved solely in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of the research.

Methods: Seven community members were recruited for the CEG, representing a diverse range of groups. Each month, Optimise data of topical importance were compiled into a draft report. The CEG discussed the draft report at their monthly meeting and members' contributions were incorporated into the final report for distribution to policy-makers. In this study, a document analysis was undertaken of ten consecutive reports produced between February and November 2021. Each report was compared pre- and post- the inclusion of CEG contributions, which were then analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: Community engagement in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of Optimise had positive impacts on reports for policy-makers, including grounding the empirical findings in broader community perspectives, identifying policy issues affecting different groups and contributing unique insights beyond the empirical findings. Overall, the CEG contributions demonstrated the complexity of lived experience lying beneath the empirical data.

Conclusion: Community engagement in the translation of the Optimise findings resulted in research reports to policy-makers that were reflective of a broader range of community perspectives, and that provided potential solutions to emerging policy issues related to COVID-19. This study adds to the evidence base about the impact of community engagement in the later interpretation and knowledge translation phases of research, particularly in the context of reporting to policy-makers during a public health emergency.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Health Policy and Management
International Journal of Health Policy and Management Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
142
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Health Policy and Management (IJHPM) is a monthly open access, peer-reviewed journal which serves as an international and interdisciplinary setting for the dissemination of health policy and management research. It brings together individual specialties from different fields, notably health management/policy/economics, epidemiology, social/public policy, and philosophy into a dynamic academic mix.
期刊最新文献
Why Are African Researchers Left Behind in Global Scientific Publications? - A Viewpoint. Grappling With the Inclusion of Patients and the Public in Consensus Building: A Commentary on Inclusion, Safety, and Accessibility; Comment on "Evaluating Public Participation in a Deliberative Dialogue: A Single Case Study". Phase IV Drug Trials With a Canadian Site: A Comparison of Industry and Non-Industry-Funded Trials. The Rhetoric of Decolonizing Global Health Fails to Address the Reality of Settler Colonialism. Gaza as a Case in Point. Building a Systems Map: Applying Systems Thinking to Unhealthy Commodity Industry Influence on Public Health Policy.
×
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