Cargando…
4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To assess researchers’ experiences working with community advisory boards (CABs) and how community member/patient stakeholder feedback impacted the research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Researchers (N = 34) who presented their research to a Mayo Clinic CAB (at MN, AZ, or FL) from 201...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8823533/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.280 |
_version_ | 1784646821225693184 |
---|---|
author | Brockman, Tabetha A. Albertie, Monica L. Stephenson, Noreen A. Penheiter, Sumedha G. Patten, Christi A. |
author_facet | Brockman, Tabetha A. Albertie, Monica L. Stephenson, Noreen A. Penheiter, Sumedha G. Patten, Christi A. |
author_sort | Brockman, Tabetha A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To assess researchers’ experiences working with community advisory boards (CABs) and how community member/patient stakeholder feedback impacted the research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Researchers (N = 34) who presented their research to a Mayo Clinic CAB (at MN, AZ, or FL) from 2014-2017 were invited to participate in an interview in-person or by phone averaging 10-15 min. Researchers were asked “In what ways did the feedback you received from the CAB influence your research?” The validated structured 7-item interview included domains assessing potential influence that CABs had on the research: 1) Pre-research (e.g., generated ideas), 2) Infrastructure (e.g., budget preparation), 3) Research design, 4) Implementation (e.g., research recruitment), 5) Analysis, 6) Dissemination, and 7) Post-research (e.g., assist in formulating next steps). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 17 interviews were completed (8 no longer at Mayo, 9 no response). Researchers presented their study to a CAB a mean of 4 years (range 3-5) before the interview. Researchers reported that the CAB had influenced their research in the following domains: 24% in pre-research, 24% infrastructure, 41% study design, 41% implementation, 6% analysis, 24% dissemination, and 18% for post-research activities. The mean total score was = 1.8 (SD = 1.7, range 0-6), of a possible range of 0-7. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Impact of CAB feedback on the research was moderate. Ways to enhance impact could include follow-up with researchers and CAB members. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8823533 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Cambridge University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88235332022-02-18 4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research Brockman, Tabetha A. Albertie, Monica L. Stephenson, Noreen A. Penheiter, Sumedha G. Patten, Christi A. J Clin Transl Sci Health Equity & Community Engagement OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To assess researchers’ experiences working with community advisory boards (CABs) and how community member/patient stakeholder feedback impacted the research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Researchers (N = 34) who presented their research to a Mayo Clinic CAB (at MN, AZ, or FL) from 2014-2017 were invited to participate in an interview in-person or by phone averaging 10-15 min. Researchers were asked “In what ways did the feedback you received from the CAB influence your research?” The validated structured 7-item interview included domains assessing potential influence that CABs had on the research: 1) Pre-research (e.g., generated ideas), 2) Infrastructure (e.g., budget preparation), 3) Research design, 4) Implementation (e.g., research recruitment), 5) Analysis, 6) Dissemination, and 7) Post-research (e.g., assist in formulating next steps). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 17 interviews were completed (8 no longer at Mayo, 9 no response). Researchers presented their study to a CAB a mean of 4 years (range 3-5) before the interview. Researchers reported that the CAB had influenced their research in the following domains: 24% in pre-research, 24% infrastructure, 41% study design, 41% implementation, 6% analysis, 24% dissemination, and 18% for post-research activities. The mean total score was = 1.8 (SD = 1.7, range 0-6), of a possible range of 0-7. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Impact of CAB feedback on the research was moderate. Ways to enhance impact could include follow-up with researchers and CAB members. Cambridge University Press 2020-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8823533/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.280 Text en © The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Health Equity & Community Engagement Brockman, Tabetha A. Albertie, Monica L. Stephenson, Noreen A. Penheiter, Sumedha G. Patten, Christi A. 4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research |
title | 4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research |
title_full | 4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research |
title_fullStr | 4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research |
title_full_unstemmed | 4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research |
title_short | 4554 Researchers’ Experiences Working With Community Advisory Boards: How Community Member and Patient Stakeholder Feedback Impacted The Research |
title_sort | 4554 researchers’ experiences working with community advisory boards: how community member and patient stakeholder feedback impacted the research |
topic | Health Equity & Community Engagement |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8823533/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.280 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT brockmantabethaa 4554researchersexperiencesworkingwithcommunityadvisoryboardshowcommunitymemberandpatientstakeholderfeedbackimpactedtheresearch AT albertiemonical 4554researchersexperiencesworkingwithcommunityadvisoryboardshowcommunitymemberandpatientstakeholderfeedbackimpactedtheresearch AT stephensonnoreena 4554researchersexperiencesworkingwithcommunityadvisoryboardshowcommunitymemberandpatientstakeholderfeedbackimpactedtheresearch AT penheitersumedhag 4554researchersexperiencesworkingwithcommunityadvisoryboardshowcommunitymemberandpatientstakeholderfeedbackimpactedtheresearch AT pattenchristia 4554researchersexperiencesworkingwithcommunityadvisoryboardshowcommunitymemberandpatientstakeholderfeedbackimpactedtheresearch |