Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study
Abstract Background: Community advisory boards (CABs) are an established approach to ensuring research reflects community priorities. This paper examines two CABs that are part of the HEALing Communities Study which aims to reduce overdose mortality. This analysis aimed to understand CAB members’...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
2024-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Clinical and Translational Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2059866123006738/type/journal_article |
| _version_ | 1827394451761266688 |
|---|---|
| author | Julie Bosak Mari-Lynn Drainoni Mia Christopher Bethany Medley Sandra Rodriguez Sydney Bell Erin Kim Caroline Stotz Greer Hamilton Carol Bigsby Faizah Gillen Jennifer Kimball Craig McClay Kim Powers Galya Walt Tracy Battaglia Deborah Chassler Linda Sprague Martinez Karsten Lunze |
| author_facet | Julie Bosak Mari-Lynn Drainoni Mia Christopher Bethany Medley Sandra Rodriguez Sydney Bell Erin Kim Caroline Stotz Greer Hamilton Carol Bigsby Faizah Gillen Jennifer Kimball Craig McClay Kim Powers Galya Walt Tracy Battaglia Deborah Chassler Linda Sprague Martinez Karsten Lunze |
| author_sort | Julie Bosak |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Abstract
Background:
Community advisory boards (CABs) are an established approach to ensuring research reflects community priorities. This paper examines two CABs that are part of the HEALing Communities Study which aims to reduce overdose mortality. This analysis aimed to understand CAB members’ expectations, experiences, and perspectives on CAB structure, communication, facilitation, and effectiveness during the first year of an almost fully remote CAB implementation. Current literature exploring these perspectives is limited.
Methods:
We collected qualitative and survey data simultaneously from members (n = 53) of two sites’ CABs in the first 9 months of CAB development. The survey assessed trust, communication, and relations; we also conducted 32 semi-structured interviews. We analyzed the survey results descriptively. The qualitative data were analyzed using a deductive codebook based on the RE-AIM PRISM framework. Themes were drawn from the combined qualitative data and triangulated with survey results to further enrich the findings.
Results:
CAB members expressed strong commitment to overall study goals and valued the representation of occupational sectors. The qualitative data described a dissonance between CAB members’ commitment to the mission and unmet expectations for influencing the study within an advisory role. Survey results indicated lower satisfaction with the research teams’ ability to create a mutually beneficial process, clear communication, and sharing of power.
Conclusion:
Building a CAB on a remote platform, within a study utilizing a community engagement strategy, still presents challenges to fully realizing the potential of a CAB. These findings can inform more effective operationalizing of community-engaged research through enhanced CAB engagement.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-03-08T18:10:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b78588c2a0694cd898e2b7f47e8d5f11 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2059-8661 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-08T18:10:49Z |
| publishDate | 2024-01-01 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Clinical and Translational Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-b78588c2a0694cd898e2b7f47e8d5f112024-01-01T07:03:42ZengCambridge University PressJournal of Clinical and Translational Science2059-86612024-01-01810.1017/cts.2023.673Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods studyJulie Bosak0https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5567-8909Mari-Lynn Drainoni1Mia Christopher2Bethany Medley3Sandra Rodriguez4Sydney Bell5Erin Kim6Caroline Stotz7Greer Hamilton8Carol Bigsby9Faizah Gillen10Jennifer Kimball11Craig McClay12Kim Powers13Galya Walt14Tracy Battaglia15Deborah Chassler16Linda Sprague Martinez17https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5070-7640Karsten Lunze18https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8495-0350Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USAColumbia University, New York, NY, USAColumbia University, New York, NY, USA Community Advisory Board Member, Boston, MA, USAColumbia University, New York, NY, USAColumbia University, New York, NY, USAColumbia University, New York, NY, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USABoston University School of Social Work, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA Community Advisory Board Member, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA Community Advisory Board Member, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USABoston University School of Social Work, Boston, MA, USABoston University School of Social Work, Boston, MA, USABoston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA Abstract Background: Community advisory boards (CABs) are an established approach to ensuring research reflects community priorities. This paper examines two CABs that are part of the HEALing Communities Study which aims to reduce overdose mortality. This analysis aimed to understand CAB members’ expectations, experiences, and perspectives on CAB structure, communication, facilitation, and effectiveness during the first year of an almost fully remote CAB implementation. Current literature exploring these perspectives is limited. Methods: We collected qualitative and survey data simultaneously from members (n = 53) of two sites’ CABs in the first 9 months of CAB development. The survey assessed trust, communication, and relations; we also conducted 32 semi-structured interviews. We analyzed the survey results descriptively. The qualitative data were analyzed using a deductive codebook based on the RE-AIM PRISM framework. Themes were drawn from the combined qualitative data and triangulated with survey results to further enrich the findings. Results: CAB members expressed strong commitment to overall study goals and valued the representation of occupational sectors. The qualitative data described a dissonance between CAB members’ commitment to the mission and unmet expectations for influencing the study within an advisory role. Survey results indicated lower satisfaction with the research teams’ ability to create a mutually beneficial process, clear communication, and sharing of power. Conclusion: Building a CAB on a remote platform, within a study utilizing a community engagement strategy, still presents challenges to fully realizing the potential of a CAB. These findings can inform more effective operationalizing of community-engaged research through enhanced CAB engagement. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2059866123006738/type/journal_articleCommunity-engaged researchqualitativecommunity advisory boardmixed methodsremote implementationcommunity engagement strategy |
| spellingShingle | Julie Bosak Mari-Lynn Drainoni Mia Christopher Bethany Medley Sandra Rodriguez Sydney Bell Erin Kim Caroline Stotz Greer Hamilton Carol Bigsby Faizah Gillen Jennifer Kimball Craig McClay Kim Powers Galya Walt Tracy Battaglia Deborah Chassler Linda Sprague Martinez Karsten Lunze Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Community-engaged research qualitative community advisory board mixed methods remote implementation community engagement strategy |
| title | Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study |
| title_full | Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study |
| title_fullStr | Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study |
| title_short | Community advisory board members’ perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study |
| title_sort | community advisory board members perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster rct a mixed methods study |
| topic | Community-engaged research qualitative community advisory board mixed methods remote implementation community engagement strategy |
| url | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2059866123006738/type/journal_article |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juliebosak communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT marilynndrainoni communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT miachristopher communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT bethanymedley communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT sandrarodriguez communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT sydneybell communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT erinkim communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT carolinestotz communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT greerhamilton communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT carolbigsby communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT faizahgillen communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT jenniferkimball communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT craigmcclay communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT kimpowers communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT galyawalt communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT tracybattaglia communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT deborahchassler communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT lindaspraguemartinez communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy AT karstenlunze communityadvisoryboardmembersperspectivesontheircontributionstoalargemultistateclusterrctamixedmethodsstudy |