Beyond co-creation: why community-centered research ecosystems and advancing community research capacity building is implementation science's next frontier.

IF 3.5
Ashley Hui Ying Teh, Shao Yuan Chong, Eleanor J Ong
{"title":"Beyond co-creation: why community-centered research ecosystems and advancing community research capacity building is implementation science's next frontier.","authors":"Ashley Hui Ying Teh, Shao Yuan Chong, Eleanor J Ong","doi":"10.1186/s43058-026-01032-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Implementation science has increasingly embraced community engagement through co-creation and community-based participatory research, yet capacity for conducting implementation research itself remains concentrated within academic institutions. This commentary argues that current approaches perpetuate structural dependencies where communities require academic intermediaries to validate knowledge about their own contexts. While implementation science invests substantially in capacity development for practitioners and researchers through training institutes and mentorship programs, these opportunities systematically exclude the communities we claim to partner with. Existing frameworks position communities primarily as sources of contextual knowledge rather than independent implementation scientists, creating bottlenecks in addressing health inequities and limiting the sustainability of implementation research capacity. Drawing on case studies from kayos kollective, a Singapore-based community research group, we illustrate how communities can develop implementation research competencies through structured capacity building that integrates research training with advocacy and program development. These examples demonstrate pathways for community members to gain methodological skills, intellectual capital, and sustained research infrastructure beyond episodic consultation models. We propose shifting from community-based participation toward community-formed research ecosystems standing infrastructures that support communities in identifying implementation problems, adapting frameworks, collecting and analysing data, and conducting advocacy independently of external investigators. This reframing positions communities as producers of implementation science rather than periodic participants and redefines academic partners as capacity builders and technical consultants. Such ecosystems preserve methodological rigour while enabling locally driven innovation and ongoing implementation learning that current participatory models cannot support. Community-formed research ecosystems also address a long-standing gap in the field: most interventions persist beyond the lifespan of research partnerships, yet communities are rarely equipped to evaluate fidelity, identify emerging barriers, or make evidence-informed adaptations once academic partners disengage. By embedding analytic and evaluative capacity directly within communities, this model creates a mechanism for sustaining implementation learning, preserving context-specific knowledge, and expanding the field's understanding of real-world implementation processes. Ultimately, decentralizing methodological authority in this way strengthens community research autonomy, supports equitable and durable implementation practices, and advances a more legitimate redistribution of research power.</p>","PeriodicalId":73355,"journal":{"name":"Implementation science communications","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13621628/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation science communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-026-01032-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Implementation science has increasingly embraced community engagement through co-creation and community-based participatory research, yet capacity for conducting implementation research itself remains concentrated within academic institutions. This commentary argues that current approaches perpetuate structural dependencies where communities require academic intermediaries to validate knowledge about their own contexts. While implementation science invests substantially in capacity development for practitioners and researchers through training institutes and mentorship programs, these opportunities systematically exclude the communities we claim to partner with. Existing frameworks position communities primarily as sources of contextual knowledge rather than independent implementation scientists, creating bottlenecks in addressing health inequities and limiting the sustainability of implementation research capacity. Drawing on case studies from kayos kollective, a Singapore-based community research group, we illustrate how communities can develop implementation research competencies through structured capacity building that integrates research training with advocacy and program development. These examples demonstrate pathways for community members to gain methodological skills, intellectual capital, and sustained research infrastructure beyond episodic consultation models. We propose shifting from community-based participation toward community-formed research ecosystems standing infrastructures that support communities in identifying implementation problems, adapting frameworks, collecting and analysing data, and conducting advocacy independently of external investigators. This reframing positions communities as producers of implementation science rather than periodic participants and redefines academic partners as capacity builders and technical consultants. Such ecosystems preserve methodological rigour while enabling locally driven innovation and ongoing implementation learning that current participatory models cannot support. Community-formed research ecosystems also address a long-standing gap in the field: most interventions persist beyond the lifespan of research partnerships, yet communities are rarely equipped to evaluate fidelity, identify emerging barriers, or make evidence-informed adaptations once academic partners disengage. By embedding analytic and evaluative capacity directly within communities, this model creates a mechanism for sustaining implementation learning, preserving context-specific knowledge, and expanding the field's understanding of real-world implementation processes. Ultimately, decentralizing methodological authority in this way strengthens community research autonomy, supports equitable and durable implementation practices, and advances a more legitimate redistribution of research power.

超越共同创造:为什么以社区为中心的研究生态系统和推进社区研究能力建设是实施科学的下一个前沿。
通过共同创造和基于社区的参与性研究,实施科学越来越多地接受了社区参与,然而开展实施研究本身的能力仍然集中在学术机构内。本评论认为,目前的方法使结构依赖永久化,社区需要学术中介来验证关于其自身背景的知识。虽然实施科学通过培训机构和指导计划大量投资于从业者和研究人员的能力发展,但这些机会系统地排除了我们声称要与之合作的社区。现有框架将社区主要定位为背景知识的来源,而不是独立的实施科学家,这在解决卫生不平等问题方面造成了瓶颈,并限制了实施研究能力的可持续性。根据新加坡社区研究组织kayos collective的案例研究,我们说明了社区如何通过将研究培训与宣传和项目开发相结合的结构化能力建设来发展实施研究能力。这些例子展示了社区成员获得方法技能、智力资本和持续研究基础设施的途径,超出了偶发咨询模式。我们建议从社区参与转向社区形成的研究生态系统,支持社区识别实施问题、调整框架、收集和分析数据以及独立于外部调查人员进行宣传的常设基础设施。这种重构将社区定位为实施科学的生产者,而不是定期参与者,并将学术伙伴重新定义为能力建设者和技术顾问。这样的生态系统既保持了方法上的严谨性,又实现了当前参与式模式无法支持的本地驱动的创新和持续的实施学习。社区形成的研究生态系统还解决了该领域一个长期存在的空白:大多数干预措施在研究伙伴关系的生命周期之后仍然存在,但一旦学术伙伴退出,社区很少有能力评估保真度、识别新出现的障碍或做出循证适应。通过在社区中直接嵌入分析和评估能力,该模型创建了一种机制,用于维持实施学习,保存特定于上下文的知识,并扩展该领域对现实世界实施过程的理解。最终,以这种方式分散方法论权威加强了社区研究自主权,支持公平和持久的实施实践,并推动了更合法的研究权力再分配。
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
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书