Open AccessEngagement of community stakeholders to develop a framework to guide research dissemination to communities
Author(s) -
CunninghamErves Jennifer,
MayoGamble Tilicia,
Vaughn Yolanda,
Hawk Jim,
Helms Mike,
Barajas Claudia,
Joosten Yvonne
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
health expectations
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.314
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1369-7625
pISSN - 1369-6513
DOI - 10.1111/hex.13076
Subject(s) - dissemination , information dissemination , general partnership , community engagement , process (computing) , public relations , medical education , psychology , knowledge management , medicine , computer science , business , political science , world wide web , telecommunications , finance , operating system
Background Dissemination of research findings to past study participants and the community‐at‐large is important. Yet, a standardized process for research dissemination is needed to report results to the community. Objective We developed a framework and strategies to guide community‐academic partnerships in community‐targeted, dissemination efforts. Methods From 2017 to 2019, a community‐academic partnership was formed in Nashville, Tennessee, and iteratively developed a framework and strategies for research dissemination using cognitive interviews. A deductive, constant comparative analysis was conducted on interview responses to examine framework and strategy content. Feedback was used to finalize the framework and strategies for the evaluation. Using existing data, the framework's utility was evaluated in seven town hall meetings (n = 117). Bivariate analyses determined its effect on community members’ trust and willingness to participate in research using pre‐ and post‐surveys. Evaluation results were used to finalize the framework. Results The Community‐Engaged Research Dissemination (CERD) framework has two phases. Phase one is a preliminary planning phase with two steps, and phase two is the four‐step dissemination process. There are five standards to be upheld conducting these phases. We provide competencies for each component. Three feasible, culturally adapted strategies were developed as exemplars to disseminate research findings. Using pre‐ and post‐surveys for intervention evaluation, there was a significant difference in trust in medical research and researchers ( P = .006) and willingness to participate in research ( P = .013). Discussion and Conclusion The CERD framework can potentially standardize the process and compare the effect of dissemination efforts on the community's trust and willingness to participate in research.