Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T11:13:23.246Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

253 What is still needed?: Community conversations about health research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2024

Cynthia Michaela Killough*
Affiliation:
University of New Mexico
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: While strategies for community engagement in health research and clinical trials are well documented, participation from underserved populations remains low. Our research team conducted a series of Community Engagement Studios for community members to discuss what is still needed for them to engage in health research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In the spring of 2023, our research team conducted four community engagement studios using the Vanderbilt Community Engagement (CE) Studio model. Community members were recruited through health councils- which are a community-led collaborative, focused on health at the county level throughout the state. In the CE Studio model community members or stakeholders are referred to as experts. In total, 31 experts from 12 different health councils from around the state participated in the CE Studios via Zoom. The CE Studios centered around two main questions 1.) What do communities want to know before agreeing to participate in research? And 2.) When a study is presented as an opportunity for your community, what things need to be addressed to see if it is a good fit? RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Themed summaries for each CE Studio and one overall themed summary were developed by a designated notetaker on the research team. Of novelty were cultural considerations for each region that included recommendations such as “Foster kinship between those doing the research and the community” speaking to the shared community bond that unites people and the need for researchers to also spend time creating meaningful community bonds throughout the research process. The CE Studio overall summary revealed two main themes for researchers: 1.) Things that help with research participation, and 2.) Things that get in the way of research participation. Overall themes echoed documented best practices for community engagement efforts. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Each CE studio revealed cultural considerations that included recommendations to researchers. Overall themes echoed documented best practices for community engagement efforts implying that while strategies for researchers to engage with communities are well known, more needs to be done to continue to implement these practices.

Type
Health Equity and Community Engagement
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. The Association for Clinical and Translational Science