Naomi Cruz, Christiana Adams, Constance Akhimien, Fauziyya Allibay Abdulkadir, Cherriece Battle, Maria Oluwayemi, Olanike Salimon, Teri Lassiter, Leslie Kantor
{"title":"Keeping the 'C' in CBPR: Exploring Community Researchers' Experiences with Human Subjects Protection Training Requirements.","authors":"Naomi Cruz, Christiana Adams, Constance Akhimien, Fauziyya Allibay Abdulkadir, Cherriece Battle, Maria Oluwayemi, Olanike Salimon, Teri Lassiter, Leslie Kantor","doi":"10.1080/08964289.2023.2249574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Community-engaged research is increasingly recognized for its potential to advance health equity. The ability to conduct such research in the United States is predicated on the completion of human subjects protection courses; however, prior studies suggest that many of these required courses may not adequately accommodate the varied skillsets and backgrounds of community members involved with carrying out research. The present study explores community researchers' (CRs') experiences with a human subjects protection course frequently required by U.S. academic institutions. Six CRs involved in conducting a community-based participatory research (CBPR) project on Black women's pregnancy-related experiences were interviewed about their completion of the required course. Across multiple interviews, CRs noted challenges with the training length, competing external demands, module readability, content relevancy, end-of-module quizzes, and technology requirements. Despite such obstacles, CRs still valued the opportunity to learn and felt more knowledgeable and capable post-course completion. Recommendations for course improvement were explored. University requirements for human subjects protection trainings may place an undue burden on community members preparing to conduct research, impede academic-community partnerships, and discourage the initiation and continuation of community-engaged studies. Course alternatives that are tailored to CRs as well as community-academic partnerships could enhance the feasibility, relevance, and effectiveness of such trainings.</p>","PeriodicalId":55395,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"279-287"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2023.2249574","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Community-engaged research is increasingly recognized for its potential to advance health equity. The ability to conduct such research in the United States is predicated on the completion of human subjects protection courses; however, prior studies suggest that many of these required courses may not adequately accommodate the varied skillsets and backgrounds of community members involved with carrying out research. The present study explores community researchers' (CRs') experiences with a human subjects protection course frequently required by U.S. academic institutions. Six CRs involved in conducting a community-based participatory research (CBPR) project on Black women's pregnancy-related experiences were interviewed about their completion of the required course. Across multiple interviews, CRs noted challenges with the training length, competing external demands, module readability, content relevancy, end-of-module quizzes, and technology requirements. Despite such obstacles, CRs still valued the opportunity to learn and felt more knowledgeable and capable post-course completion. Recommendations for course improvement were explored. University requirements for human subjects protection trainings may place an undue burden on community members preparing to conduct research, impede academic-community partnerships, and discourage the initiation and continuation of community-engaged studies. Course alternatives that are tailored to CRs as well as community-academic partnerships could enhance the feasibility, relevance, and effectiveness of such trainings.
期刊介绍:
Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal, which fosters and promotes the exchange of knowledge and the advancement of theory in the field of behavioral medicine, including but not limited to understandings of disease prevention, health promotion, health disparities, identification of health risk factors, and interventions designed to reduce health risks, ameliorate health disparities, enhancing all aspects of health. The journal seeks to advance knowledge and theory in these domains in all segments of the population and across the lifespan, in local, national, and global contexts, and with an emphasis on the synergies that exist between biological, psychological, psychosocial, and structural factors as they related to these areas of study and across health states.
Behavioral Medicine publishes original empirical studies (experimental and observational research studies, quantitative and qualitative studies, evaluation studies) as well as clinical/case studies. The journal also publishes review articles, which provide systematic evaluations of the literature and propose alternative and innovative theoretical paradigms, as well as brief reports and responses to articles previously published in Behavioral Medicine.