Engagement Quality, Partnership Processes, and Network Characteristics of a Community-Academic Collaboration to Advance Health Equity.

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Lisa A Cooper, Katherine B Dietz, Christina T Yuan, Kathryn A Carson, Benjamin P L Meza, Christina Vincent, Chioma Onuoha, Hsin-Chieh Yeh, Deidra C Crews, Chidinma A Ibe, Jill A Marsteller, Michelle Simmons, Debra Hickman, Lee R Bone
{"title":"Engagement Quality, Partnership Processes, and Network Characteristics of a Community-Academic Collaboration to Advance Health Equity.","authors":"Lisa A Cooper, Katherine B Dietz, Christina T Yuan, Kathryn A Carson, Benjamin P L Meza, Christina Vincent, Chioma Onuoha, Hsin-Chieh Yeh, Deidra C Crews, Chidinma A Ibe, Jill A Marsteller, Michelle Simmons, Debra Hickman, Lee R Bone","doi":"10.1353/cpr.2025.a956593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess engagement quality, partnership processes, and network characteristics of a community-academic research collaboration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed community and academic members of a community advisory board (CAB) in Baltimore, Maryland (December 2019 to August 2020) to assess demographics, health equity work experiences, quality of community engagement and partnership, and collaborative networks among members.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-four members completed the survey (77% response rate). Members reported a median of 10 years of health equity work experience and 2 years serving on the CAB. Community (non-academic) members rated the quality of community engagement and most domains of partnership, except quality of decision-making, as high (~4/5). CAB members reported collaborative ties, on average, with 16 to 17 other members. Academic members had nearly twice the ties of community members. Community members' number of ties and engagement ratings were not associated.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this CAB, collaborative ties were numerous. Although community members rated the CAB's engagement and partnership quality favorably on several dimensions, additional efforts to enhance decision-making processes and members' influence and outreach within the network could further promote achievement of the CAB's goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":46970,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Community Health Partnerships-Research Education and Action","volume":"19 1","pages":"13-23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Community Health Partnerships-Research Education and Action","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2025.a956593","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess engagement quality, partnership processes, and network characteristics of a community-academic research collaboration.

Methods: We surveyed community and academic members of a community advisory board (CAB) in Baltimore, Maryland (December 2019 to August 2020) to assess demographics, health equity work experiences, quality of community engagement and partnership, and collaborative networks among members.

Results: Fifty-four members completed the survey (77% response rate). Members reported a median of 10 years of health equity work experience and 2 years serving on the CAB. Community (non-academic) members rated the quality of community engagement and most domains of partnership, except quality of decision-making, as high (~4/5). CAB members reported collaborative ties, on average, with 16 to 17 other members. Academic members had nearly twice the ties of community members. Community members' number of ties and engagement ratings were not associated.

Conclusions: In this CAB, collaborative ties were numerous. Although community members rated the CAB's engagement and partnership quality favorably on several dimensions, additional efforts to enhance decision-making processes and members' influence and outreach within the network could further promote achievement of the CAB's goals.

参与质量,伙伴关系过程,以及社区-学术合作促进健康公平的网络特征。
目的:评估社区学术研究合作的参与质量、伙伴关系过程和网络特征。方法:我们调查了马里兰州巴尔的摩市社区咨询委员会(CAB)的社区和学术成员(2019年12月至2020年8月),以评估人口统计学、卫生公平工作经验、社区参与和伙伴关系的质量以及成员之间的协作网络。结果:54名成员完成了调查,回复率为77%。成员报告的卫生公平工作经验中位数为10年,在咨询委员会任职2年。社区(非学术)成员认为社区参与的质量和大多数合作领域,除了决策的质量,是高的(~4/5)。CAB成员报告说,他们平均与16到17个其他成员有合作关系。学术成员的联系几乎是社区成员的两倍。社区成员的联系数量和参与度评级没有关联。结论:在该CAB中,合作关系众多。虽然社区成员在若干方面对咨询委员会的参与和伙伴关系质量评价较高,但为加强决策进程和成员在网络内的影响力和外联所作的进一步努力可进一步促进咨询委员会目标的实现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信