Cargando…
3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs)
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The foci of this evaluation is to:. determine if cultural and contextual adaptations identified by community stakeholders via ShARP sessions change research design/implementation/dissemination strategies. examine changes in stakeholder engagement by the research team after...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6799652/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.211 |
_version_ | 1783460333941161984 |
---|---|
author | Robles-Schrader, Grisel M. Serrato, Josefina Padilla, Roxane Fagen, Michael |
author_facet | Robles-Schrader, Grisel M. Serrato, Josefina Padilla, Roxane Fagen, Michael |
author_sort | Robles-Schrader, Grisel M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The foci of this evaluation is to:. determine if cultural and contextual adaptations identified by community stakeholders via ShARP sessions change research design/implementation/dissemination strategies. examine changes in stakeholder engagement by the research team after the initial ShARP session. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: CCH staff measured session effectiveness for multiple stakeholders at multiple time points. Researchers and community stakeholders completed surveys to assess process and function at the end of the session. CCH staff follow-up with researcher team members approximately 12-18 months after the session to assess longer term outcomes and changes resulting from stakeholder input gathered at the ShARP. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS:. 16 ShARPs sessions were hosted in a three year period. o 4 hosted in Spanish o 2 focused solely on youth populations. 141 stakeholders representing diverse professional backgrounds participated in sessions and represented a cross section of: o Ages: 12- 17 (5%); 18-24 (6%); 25-34 (24%); 35-44 (23%); 45-54 (12%); 55-64 (9%); 65 and older (13%); No Response (8%) o Gender Identities: Female (62%); Male (34%); Transgender (0%); No Response (4%) o Race/Ethnicities: Asian, Pacific Islander (13%); African American/Black (28%); Hispanic/Latino/x (25%); Native Americans, First Nations, American Indian (0%); Caucasian/White (24%); Multiracial (2%); No Response (9%). Feedback from research teams (aggregate of Strongly Agreed/Agreed responses) o ShARP panel was made up of relevant stakeholders (97%) o ShARP session was worthwhile (100%) o Stakeholder input will improve my research project (100%) o I would engage stakeholders in future projects (40%). Feedback from community stakeholders (aggregate of Strongly Agreed/Agreed responses) o ShARP session worthwhile (89%) o I have an increased understanding of research after participating in this session (89%) o Based on the experience, would consider providing input on a research study in the future (90%) o This session was the first time I was asked to provide input on a research study (46%) DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Preliminary results indicate engaging stakeholders in research can provide cultural and contextual adaptations that increase research relevance and feasibility in any phase of research. Conversely, stakeholders indicated an increased understanding of research. This poster will feature stakeholder and researcher perspectives. Increasing dialogues between research teams and community stakeholders can improve research design and relevance. The ShARPs programs aims to increase these types of dialogues which can be especially important for research teams who are unsure of who or how to begin engaging stakeholders in research. Gathering additional data via follow-up interviews will help us better understand the impact this program has on long term stakeholder engagement in research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6799652 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Cambridge University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67996522019-10-28 3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs) Robles-Schrader, Grisel M. Serrato, Josefina Padilla, Roxane Fagen, Michael J Clin Transl Sci Health Equity & Community Engagement OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The foci of this evaluation is to:. determine if cultural and contextual adaptations identified by community stakeholders via ShARP sessions change research design/implementation/dissemination strategies. examine changes in stakeholder engagement by the research team after the initial ShARP session. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: CCH staff measured session effectiveness for multiple stakeholders at multiple time points. Researchers and community stakeholders completed surveys to assess process and function at the end of the session. CCH staff follow-up with researcher team members approximately 12-18 months after the session to assess longer term outcomes and changes resulting from stakeholder input gathered at the ShARP. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS:. 16 ShARPs sessions were hosted in a three year period. o 4 hosted in Spanish o 2 focused solely on youth populations. 141 stakeholders representing diverse professional backgrounds participated in sessions and represented a cross section of: o Ages: 12- 17 (5%); 18-24 (6%); 25-34 (24%); 35-44 (23%); 45-54 (12%); 55-64 (9%); 65 and older (13%); No Response (8%) o Gender Identities: Female (62%); Male (34%); Transgender (0%); No Response (4%) o Race/Ethnicities: Asian, Pacific Islander (13%); African American/Black (28%); Hispanic/Latino/x (25%); Native Americans, First Nations, American Indian (0%); Caucasian/White (24%); Multiracial (2%); No Response (9%). Feedback from research teams (aggregate of Strongly Agreed/Agreed responses) o ShARP panel was made up of relevant stakeholders (97%) o ShARP session was worthwhile (100%) o Stakeholder input will improve my research project (100%) o I would engage stakeholders in future projects (40%). Feedback from community stakeholders (aggregate of Strongly Agreed/Agreed responses) o ShARP session worthwhile (89%) o I have an increased understanding of research after participating in this session (89%) o Based on the experience, would consider providing input on a research study in the future (90%) o This session was the first time I was asked to provide input on a research study (46%) DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Preliminary results indicate engaging stakeholders in research can provide cultural and contextual adaptations that increase research relevance and feasibility in any phase of research. Conversely, stakeholders indicated an increased understanding of research. This poster will feature stakeholder and researcher perspectives. Increasing dialogues between research teams and community stakeholders can improve research design and relevance. The ShARPs programs aims to increase these types of dialogues which can be especially important for research teams who are unsure of who or how to begin engaging stakeholders in research. Gathering additional data via follow-up interviews will help us better understand the impact this program has on long term stakeholder engagement in research. Cambridge University Press 2019-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6799652/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.211 Text en © The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncnd/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. |
spellingShingle | Health Equity & Community Engagement Robles-Schrader, Grisel M. Serrato, Josefina Padilla, Roxane Fagen, Michael 3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs) |
title | 3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs) |
title_full | 3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs) |
title_fullStr | 3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs) |
title_full_unstemmed | 3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs) |
title_short | 3151 It all starts with a dialogue – Stimulating Engaged Research Opportunities through Stakeholder-Academic Resource Panel (ShARPs) |
title_sort | 3151 it all starts with a dialogue – stimulating engaged research opportunities through stakeholder-academic resource panel (sharps) |
topic | Health Equity & Community Engagement |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6799652/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.211 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT roblesschradergriselm 3151itallstartswithadialoguestimulatingengagedresearchopportunitiesthroughstakeholderacademicresourcepanelsharps AT serratojosefina 3151itallstartswithadialoguestimulatingengagedresearchopportunitiesthroughstakeholderacademicresourcepanelsharps AT padillaroxane 3151itallstartswithadialoguestimulatingengagedresearchopportunitiesthroughstakeholderacademicresourcepanelsharps AT fagenmichael 3151itallstartswithadialoguestimulatingengagedresearchopportunitiesthroughstakeholderacademicresourcepanelsharps |