Nolan Kline, Stacey Griner, Malinee Neelamegam, Nathaniel Webb, Srivennela Veeramachaneni, Deborah Morris-Harris, John Carlo, Jonathan Guadian, Barbara Dunlap
{"title":"Academic Institutional Barriers and Facilitators to Community-Based Participatory Research.","authors":"Nolan Kline, Stacey Griner, Malinee Neelamegam, Nathaniel Webb, Srivennela Veeramachaneni, Deborah Morris-Harris, John Carlo, Jonathan Guadian, Barbara Dunlap","doi":"10.1353/cpr.2025.a965358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Collaborative research between researchers and community members can meaningfully address public health concerns. Collaboration can be complicated, however, due to unanticipated challenges stemming from academic institutions. This article describes how academic institutions can hinder and facilitate community-based research.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We evaluated a research partnership focused on structural determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Latinx people who (1) have a precarious immigration status; (2) are sexual and gender minorities; and (3) can become pregnant.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We completed a process evaluation with community organization partners who collaborated on the study. We asked community partners to describe benefits and challenges of collaborating with academic institutions.</p><p><strong>Lessons learned: </strong>Our evaluation revealed institutional challenges to successful community-based partnerships, including institutional review board delays and institutional expectations that failed to understand grassroots community organizations. Using the concept of bureaucratic violence, we describe how academic institutions can constrain community-based research and provide suggestions for how academic partners might overcome institutional hurdles.</p>","PeriodicalId":46970,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Community Health Partnerships-Research Education and Action","volume":"19 2","pages":"213-218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"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.a965358","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
Background: Collaborative research between researchers and community members can meaningfully address public health concerns. Collaboration can be complicated, however, due to unanticipated challenges stemming from academic institutions. This article describes how academic institutions can hinder and facilitate community-based research.
Objectives: We evaluated a research partnership focused on structural determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Latinx people who (1) have a precarious immigration status; (2) are sexual and gender minorities; and (3) can become pregnant.
Methods: We completed a process evaluation with community organization partners who collaborated on the study. We asked community partners to describe benefits and challenges of collaborating with academic institutions.
Lessons learned: Our evaluation revealed institutional challenges to successful community-based partnerships, including institutional review board delays and institutional expectations that failed to understand grassroots community organizations. Using the concept of bureaucratic violence, we describe how academic institutions can constrain community-based research and provide suggestions for how academic partners might overcome institutional hurdles.