Cargando…
Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade
BACKGROUND: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been applied by health researchers and practitioners to address health disparities and community empowerment for health promotion. Despite the growing popularity of CBPR projects, there has been little effort to synthesize the literature...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3389435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22783464 |
_version_ | 1782237312581632000 |
---|---|
author | Salimi, Yahya Shahandeh, Khandan Malekafzali, Hossein Loori, Nina Kheiltash, Azita Jamshidi, Ensiyeh Frouzan, Ameneh S. Majdzadeh, Reza |
author_facet | Salimi, Yahya Shahandeh, Khandan Malekafzali, Hossein Loori, Nina Kheiltash, Azita Jamshidi, Ensiyeh Frouzan, Ameneh S. Majdzadeh, Reza |
author_sort | Salimi, Yahya |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been applied by health researchers and practitioners to address health disparities and community empowerment for health promotion. Despite the growing popularity of CBPR projects, there has been little effort to synthesize the literature to evaluate CBPR projects. The present review attempts to identify appropriate elements that may contribute to the successful or unsuccessful interventions. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken using evidence identified through searching electronic databases, web sites, and reference list checks. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were assessed by reviewers. Levels of evidence, accounting for methodologic quality, were assessed for 3 types of CBPR approaches, including interventional, observational, and qualitative research design as well as CBPR elements through separate abstraction forms. Each included study was appraised with 2 quality grades, one for the elements of CBPR and one for research design. RESULTS: Of 14,222 identified articles, 403 included in the abstract review. Of these, 70 CBPR studies, that 56 intervention studies had different designs, and finally 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings show that collaboration among community partners, researchers, and organizations led to community-level action to improve the health and wellbeing and to minimize health disparities. It enhanced the capacity of the community in terms of research and leadership skills. The result provided examples of effective CBPR that took place in a variety of communities. However, little has been written about the organizational capacities required to make these efforts successful. CONCLUSION: Some evidences were found for potentially effective strategies to increase the participant's levels of CBPR activities. Interventions that included community involvement have the potential to make important differences to levels of activities and should be promoted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3389435 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-33894352012-07-10 Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade Salimi, Yahya Shahandeh, Khandan Malekafzali, Hossein Loori, Nina Kheiltash, Azita Jamshidi, Ensiyeh Frouzan, Ameneh S. Majdzadeh, Reza Int J Prev Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been applied by health researchers and practitioners to address health disparities and community empowerment for health promotion. Despite the growing popularity of CBPR projects, there has been little effort to synthesize the literature to evaluate CBPR projects. The present review attempts to identify appropriate elements that may contribute to the successful or unsuccessful interventions. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken using evidence identified through searching electronic databases, web sites, and reference list checks. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were assessed by reviewers. Levels of evidence, accounting for methodologic quality, were assessed for 3 types of CBPR approaches, including interventional, observational, and qualitative research design as well as CBPR elements through separate abstraction forms. Each included study was appraised with 2 quality grades, one for the elements of CBPR and one for research design. RESULTS: Of 14,222 identified articles, 403 included in the abstract review. Of these, 70 CBPR studies, that 56 intervention studies had different designs, and finally 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings show that collaboration among community partners, researchers, and organizations led to community-level action to improve the health and wellbeing and to minimize health disparities. It enhanced the capacity of the community in terms of research and leadership skills. The result provided examples of effective CBPR that took place in a variety of communities. However, little has been written about the organizational capacities required to make these efforts successful. CONCLUSION: Some evidences were found for potentially effective strategies to increase the participant's levels of CBPR activities. Interventions that included community involvement have the potential to make important differences to levels of activities and should be promoted. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3389435/ /pubmed/22783464 Text en Copyright: © International Journal of Preventive Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Salimi, Yahya Shahandeh, Khandan Malekafzali, Hossein Loori, Nina Kheiltash, Azita Jamshidi, Ensiyeh Frouzan, Ameneh S. Majdzadeh, Reza Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade |
title | Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade |
title_full | Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade |
title_fullStr | Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade |
title_full_unstemmed | Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade |
title_short | Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade |
title_sort | is community-based participatory research (cbpr) useful? a systematic review on papers in a decade |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3389435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22783464 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT salimiyahya iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade AT shahandehkhandan iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade AT malekafzalihossein iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade AT loorinina iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade AT kheiltashazita iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade AT jamshidiensiyeh iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade AT frouzanamenehs iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade AT majdzadehreza iscommunitybasedparticipatoryresearchcbprusefulasystematicreviewonpapersinadecade |