促进共同研究:从三个参与式行动研究项目的反思表中汲取的经验教训。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Research Policy and Systems Pub Date : 2024-08-23 DOI:10.1186/s12961-024-01210-x
Helga Emke, Ann Vandendriessche, Mai Chinapaw, Benedicte Deforche, Maïté Verloigne, Teatske Altenburg, Manou Anselma
{"title":"促进共同研究:从三个参与式行动研究项目的反思表中汲取的经验教训。","authors":"Helga Emke, Ann Vandendriessche, Mai Chinapaw, Benedicte Deforche, Maïté Verloigne, Teatske Altenburg, Manou Anselma","doi":"10.1186/s12961-024-01210-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mutual learning and shared decision-making are key elements of Participatory Action Research (PAR), highlighting the important role of the facilitator to support this. This study aims to illustrate how a facilitator can contribute to successful PAR sessions based on the reflection of three PAR projects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participatory sessions took place with adolescents for 3-4 school years. After each session (n = 252 sessions across three projects), facilitators filled in a reflection form that assessed the group process and their facilitating role. Facilitators independently coded a selection of 135 reflection forms partly deductive and partly inductive based on core PAR principles derived from a pragmatic literature search.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A well-prepared session - for example, including active and creative participatory methods and a clearly stated goal - contributed to efficiency and the necessary flexibility. Making agreements, making sure everyone is heard and taking 'fun-time' appeared important for creating and maintaining a safe, functional and positive atmosphere. Finally, facilitators needed to encourage co-researchers to take the lead and adapt to the group dynamics, to ensure ownership and shared decision-making.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In-depth qualitative analyses of a standardized reflection form used in three different PAR projects resulted in various lessons to support facilitators in collaborating with co-researchers in PAR projects.</p>","PeriodicalId":12870,"journal":{"name":"Health Research Policy and Systems","volume":"22 1","pages":"117"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11342652/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facilitating co-research: lessons learned from reflection forms within three participatory action research projects.\",\"authors\":\"Helga Emke, Ann Vandendriessche, Mai Chinapaw, Benedicte Deforche, Maïté Verloigne, Teatske Altenburg, Manou Anselma\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12961-024-01210-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mutual learning and shared decision-making are key elements of Participatory Action Research (PAR), highlighting the important role of the facilitator to support this. This study aims to illustrate how a facilitator can contribute to successful PAR sessions based on the reflection of three PAR projects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participatory sessions took place with adolescents for 3-4 school years. After each session (n = 252 sessions across three projects), facilitators filled in a reflection form that assessed the group process and their facilitating role. Facilitators independently coded a selection of 135 reflection forms partly deductive and partly inductive based on core PAR principles derived from a pragmatic literature search.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A well-prepared session - for example, including active and creative participatory methods and a clearly stated goal - contributed to efficiency and the necessary flexibility. Making agreements, making sure everyone is heard and taking 'fun-time' appeared important for creating and maintaining a safe, functional and positive atmosphere. Finally, facilitators needed to encourage co-researchers to take the lead and adapt to the group dynamics, to ensure ownership and shared decision-making.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In-depth qualitative analyses of a standardized reflection form used in three different PAR projects resulted in various lessons to support facilitators in collaborating with co-researchers in PAR projects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12870,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"117\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11342652/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01210-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Research Policy and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01210-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:相互学习和共同决策是参与式行动研究(PAR)的关键要素,突出了促进者在支持这一过程中的重要作用。本研究旨在通过对三个参与式行动研究项目的反思,说明促进者如何为成功开展参与式行动研究做出贡献:方法:在 3-4 个学年中与青少年一起开展参与式课程。每次会议(三个项目共 252 次会议)结束后,主持人都要填写一份反思表,对小组进程及其主持人的角色进行评估。根据实用文献检索得出的 PAR 核心原则,主持人对 135 份反思表进行了部分演绎和部分归纳的独立编码:准备充分的会议--例如,包括积极和创造性的参与方法以及明确的目标--有助于提高效率和必要的灵活性。达成一致意见、确保每个人的意见都被听取以及利用 "娱乐时间 "对于营造和维持安全、实用和积极的氛围似乎很重要。最后,主持人需要鼓励共同研究者发挥主导作用,适应小组的动态发展,以确保主人翁精神和共同决策:通过对三个不同的 PAR 项目中使用的标准化反思表进行深入的定性分析,得出了各种经验教 训,有助于促进者在 PAR 项目中与共同研究者合作。
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
Facilitating co-research: lessons learned from reflection forms within three participatory action research projects.

Background: Mutual learning and shared decision-making are key elements of Participatory Action Research (PAR), highlighting the important role of the facilitator to support this. This study aims to illustrate how a facilitator can contribute to successful PAR sessions based on the reflection of three PAR projects.

Methods: Participatory sessions took place with adolescents for 3-4 school years. After each session (n = 252 sessions across three projects), facilitators filled in a reflection form that assessed the group process and their facilitating role. Facilitators independently coded a selection of 135 reflection forms partly deductive and partly inductive based on core PAR principles derived from a pragmatic literature search.

Results: A well-prepared session - for example, including active and creative participatory methods and a clearly stated goal - contributed to efficiency and the necessary flexibility. Making agreements, making sure everyone is heard and taking 'fun-time' appeared important for creating and maintaining a safe, functional and positive atmosphere. Finally, facilitators needed to encourage co-researchers to take the lead and adapt to the group dynamics, to ensure ownership and shared decision-making.

Conclusion: In-depth qualitative analyses of a standardized reflection form used in three different PAR projects resulted in various lessons to support facilitators in collaborating with co-researchers in PAR projects.

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
Health Research Policy and Systems
Health Research Policy and Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
124
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Research Policy and Systems is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to provide a platform for the global research community to share their views, findings, insights and successes. Health Research Policy and Systems considers manuscripts that investigate the role of evidence-based health policy and health research systems in ensuring the efficient utilization and application of knowledge to improve health and health equity, especially in developing countries. Research is the foundation for improvements in public health. The problem is that people involved in different areas of research, together with managers and administrators in charge of research entities, do not communicate sufficiently with each other.
期刊最新文献
Leveraging international stakeholders' experiences with oral PrEP costs to accelerate implementation of the monthly dapivirine vaginal ring: A qualitative study. The embedded research model: an answer to the research and evaluation needs of community service organizations? Implementation of national policies and interventions (WHO Best Buys) for non-communicable disease prevention and control in Ghana: a mixed methods analysis. Policy impact of the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team: global perspective and United Kingdom case study. Real-world data to improve organ and tissue donation policies: lessons learned from the tissue and organ donor epidemiology study.
×
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