TY - JOUR
T1 - Community engagement practices at research centers in u.S. minority institutions
T2 - Priority populations and innovative approaches to advancing health disparities research
AU - Henry Akintobi, Tabia
AU - Sheikhattari, Payam
AU - Shaffer, Emma
AU - Evans, Christina L.
AU - Braun, Kathryn L.
AU - Sy, Angela U.
AU - Mancera, Bibiana
AU - Campa, Adriana
AU - Miller, Stephania T.
AU - Sarpong, Daniel
AU - Holliday, Rhonda
AU - Jimenez-Chavez, Julio
AU - Khan, Shafiq
AU - Hinton, Cimona
AU - Sellars-Bates, Kimberly
AU - Ajewole, Veronica
AU - Teufel-Shone, Nicolette I.
AU - McMullin, Juliet
AU - Suther, Sandra
AU - Kimbro, K. Sean
AU - Taylor, Lorraine
AU - Vega, Carmen M.Velez
AU - Williams, Carla
AU - Perry, George
AU - Zuchner, Stephan
AU - Rodriguez, Melissa Marzan
AU - Tchounwou, Paul B.
N1 - Funding Information:
Several other NIH funded infrastructure grants have or had specific goals to reduce health disparities and/or conduct translational research through U54 funding mechanisms. This funding mechanism supports a spectrum of research and related infrastructures from basic to clinical. Activities may be multidisciplinary or biomedical. A few noteworthy U54 funding mechanisms have included community engagement components. For example, the Community Network Program Centers (CNPCs), funded through the National Cancer Institute, were required to use community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches to reduce cancer disparities in communities [6,7].The Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity Program, initiated in 2001, provides cancer-related education and awareness outreach activities and develops community partnerships with underserved communities to study cancer health disparities and their impact on racial/ethnic minorities, medically underserved, and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations [8]. The Institutional Development Award (IDeA) Program was established in 1993 to enhance biomedical research activities in states that have had historically low NIH grant funding success rates. An IDeA Clinical Translation Research Program contains a community engagement and outreach core to identify priority health issues and the concerns of communities within participating states and to develop plans for building the capacity to respond to these concerns [9]. The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program is a national network of medical research institutions that work to improve the translational research process and to reduce the time it takes to move research from the bench to the bedside and, ultimately, to communities. Along with providing core resources, mentoring, training, and opportunities to develop innovative approaches and technologies, CTSAs must sponsor a community engagement program [10,11].
Funding Information:
Research reported in this publication leveraged supported by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities of the National Institutes of Health under Award numbers, U54MD013376, U54MD007601, U54MD007601, U54MD007592, U54MD012393, U54MD007586, U54MD007595, U54MD007602, U54MD007579, U54MD007590, U54MD007590, U54MD007593, U54MD007600 U54MD007605, U54MD012388, U54MD013368, U54MD007582 U54MD012392, U54MD012392, U54MD007597 and U24MD015970. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2021/6/21
Y1 - 2021/6/21
N2 - This paper details U.S. Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Community Engagement Cores (CECs): (1) unique and cross-cutting components, focus areas, specific aims, and target populations; and (2) approaches utilized to build or sustain trust towards community participation in research. A mixed-method data collection approach was employed for this cross-sectional study of current or previously funded RCMIs. A total of 18 of the 25 institutions spanning 13 U.S. states and territories participated. CEC specific aims were to support community engaged research (94%); to translate and disseminate research findings (88%); to develop partnerships (82%); and to build capacity around community research (71%). Four open-ended questions, qualitative analysis, and comparison of the categories led to the emergence of two supporting themes: (1) establishing trust between the community-academic collaborators and within the community and (2) building collaborative relationships. An overarching theme, building community together through trust and meaningful collaborations, emerged from the supporting themes and subthemes. The RCMI institutions and their CECs serve as models to circumvent the historical and current challenges to research in communities disproportionately affected by health disparities. Lessons learned from these cores may help other institutions who want to build community trust in and capacities for research that addresses community-related health concerns.
AB - This paper details U.S. Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Community Engagement Cores (CECs): (1) unique and cross-cutting components, focus areas, specific aims, and target populations; and (2) approaches utilized to build or sustain trust towards community participation in research. A mixed-method data collection approach was employed for this cross-sectional study of current or previously funded RCMIs. A total of 18 of the 25 institutions spanning 13 U.S. states and territories participated. CEC specific aims were to support community engaged research (94%); to translate and disseminate research findings (88%); to develop partnerships (82%); and to build capacity around community research (71%). Four open-ended questions, qualitative analysis, and comparison of the categories led to the emergence of two supporting themes: (1) establishing trust between the community-academic collaborators and within the community and (2) building collaborative relationships. An overarching theme, building community together through trust and meaningful collaborations, emerged from the supporting themes and subthemes. The RCMI institutions and their CECs serve as models to circumvent the historical and current challenges to research in communities disproportionately affected by health disparities. Lessons learned from these cores may help other institutions who want to build community trust in and capacities for research that addresses community-related health concerns.
KW - Best practices
KW - Community-engaged research
KW - Lessons learned
KW - Research centers in minority institutions
KW - Translation
KW - Minority Groups
KW - Cross-Sectional Studies
KW - Humans
KW - Community Participation
KW - Research Design
KW - Trust
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85108166422&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85108166422&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/ijerph18126675
DO - 10.3390/ijerph18126675
M3 - Article
C2 - 34205781
AN - SCOPUS:85108166422
SN - 1661-7827
VL - 18
JO - International journal of environmental research and public health
JF - International journal of environmental research and public health
IS - 12
M1 - 6675
ER -