Choosing strategies that work from the start: A mixed methods study to understand effective development of community-academic partnerships.

IF 1.6 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Action Research Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Epub Date: 2018-05-19 DOI:10.1177/1476750318775796
Emily Gomez, Amy Drahota, Aubyn C Stahmer
{"title":"Choosing strategies that work from the start: A mixed methods study to understand effective development of community-academic partnerships.","authors":"Emily Gomez,&nbsp;Amy Drahota,&nbsp;Aubyn C Stahmer","doi":"10.1177/1476750318775796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Community-academic partnerships are believed to increase the effectiveness and feasibility of action research. While factors facilitating and hindering community-academic partnerships have been identified, their influence on the collaborative process is unknown, especially during community-academic partnership initiation and development. This explanatory sequential mixed methods study (quantitative→QUALITATIVE) evaluated perspectives of members in an autism community-academic partnership to determine frequently endorsed and influential factors facilitating and hindering the collaborative process during the community-academic partnership's development. Participants (<i>n</i> = 11; community stakeholders, implementation scientist, and researchers) endorsed and ranked the importance of factors present in the formation of the community-academic partnership then completed a semi-structured qualitative interview to elaborate on survey responses. Interviews were coded using a coding, comparison, and consensus method and analyzed using the Rapid Assessment Process for frequency and salience of themes across interviews. Integrating mixed methods yielded ranked factors that were perceived to facilitate and hinder the development of the community-academic partnership, and highlighted the relative influence of interpersonal factors on the facilitation of community-academic partnership processes and organizational factors on the hindrance of community-academic partnership processes during development. Some discrepancies emerged between community and academic partners. Results may assist to improve the development of community-academic partnerships, which is becoming increasingly important in healthcare services research, dissemination, and implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":46969,"journal":{"name":"Action Research","volume":"19 2","pages":"277-300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1476750318775796","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Action Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750318775796","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Community-academic partnerships are believed to increase the effectiveness and feasibility of action research. While factors facilitating and hindering community-academic partnerships have been identified, their influence on the collaborative process is unknown, especially during community-academic partnership initiation and development. This explanatory sequential mixed methods study (quantitative→QUALITATIVE) evaluated perspectives of members in an autism community-academic partnership to determine frequently endorsed and influential factors facilitating and hindering the collaborative process during the community-academic partnership's development. Participants (n = 11; community stakeholders, implementation scientist, and researchers) endorsed and ranked the importance of factors present in the formation of the community-academic partnership then completed a semi-structured qualitative interview to elaborate on survey responses. Interviews were coded using a coding, comparison, and consensus method and analyzed using the Rapid Assessment Process for frequency and salience of themes across interviews. Integrating mixed methods yielded ranked factors that were perceived to facilitate and hinder the development of the community-academic partnership, and highlighted the relative influence of interpersonal factors on the facilitation of community-academic partnership processes and organizational factors on the hindrance of community-academic partnership processes during development. Some discrepancies emerged between community and academic partners. Results may assist to improve the development of community-academic partnerships, which is becoming increasingly important in healthcare services research, dissemination, and implementation.

选择从一开始就有效的策略:一项混合方法研究,以了解社区-学术伙伴关系的有效发展。
社区学术伙伴关系被认为可以提高行动研究的有效性和可行性。虽然已经确定了促进和阻碍社区-学术伙伴关系的因素,但它们对合作过程的影响尚不清楚,特别是在社区-学术伙伴关系的发起和发展过程中。本解释性顺序混合方法研究(定量→定性)评估了自闭症社区-学术伙伴关系成员的观点,以确定在社区-学术伙伴关系发展过程中促进和阻碍合作过程的常见认可和影响因素。参与者(n = 11;社区利益相关者(实施科学家和研究人员)对社区-学术伙伴关系形成过程中存在的因素的重要性进行了认可和排名,然后完成了半结构化的定性访谈,以详细说明调查结果。访谈使用编码、比较和共识方法进行编码,并使用快速评估过程对访谈中主题的频率和显著性进行分析。综合混合方法得出了促进和阻碍社区-学术伙伴关系发展的因素排名,并突出了人际因素对社区-学术伙伴关系进程促进和组织因素对社区-学术伙伴关系进程阻碍的相对影响。社区和学术合作伙伴之间出现了一些差异。结果可能有助于改善社区学术伙伴关系的发展,这在医疗保健服务的研究、传播和实施中变得越来越重要。
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
Action Research
Action Research Multiple-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Action Research is a new international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal which is a forum for the development of the theory and practice of action research. Our purpose with this international, peer reviewed journal is to offer a forum for participative, action oriented inquiry into questions that matter--questions relevant to people in the conduct of their lives, that enable them to flourish in their organizations and communities, and that evince a deep concern for the wider ecology. The aim of the journal is to offer a viable alternative to dominant "disinterested" models of social science, one that is relevant to people in the conduct of their lives, their organizations and their communities.
×
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