让社区参与进来:遗传学服务提供环境中基于社区的参与式研究范围文献综述。

IF 1.5 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Heather A Zierhut, Pranathi Kandikonda, Emily M Simon, Cameron Donarski, Megan Kocher, Mariana Ramírez, Crystal Y Lumpkins, Elena R Fisher
{"title":"让社区参与进来:遗传学服务提供环境中基于社区的参与式研究范围文献综述。","authors":"Heather A Zierhut, Pranathi Kandikonda, Emily M Simon, Cameron Donarski, Megan Kocher, Mariana Ramírez, Crystal Y Lumpkins, Elena R Fisher","doi":"10.1007/s12687-024-00740-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Genetic counseling (GC) services have the potential to improve health outcomes, yet there are documented disparities in the use of GC services among minoritized racial/ethnic populations. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an approach to integrate diverse patient perspectives to improve GC services. The objective of this review was to assess the current state of international CBPR within GC and genetics services from 2006 to 2023. Five databases were searched for inclusion criteria: 1) published in 2006 or later; 2) peer-reviewed publication; 3) primary research studies; 4) community-based AND participatory research; 5) focused on GC, clinical genetics, testing, and/or genetic service delivery. Criteria for evaluating CBPR involvement used a synthesis of best processes framework. Screening of 3,824 studies identified 16 papers (n = 12 qualitative; n = 1 quantitative; n = 3 mixed methods). The majority of studies were conducted within the U.S. (n = 12), focused on cancer (n = 5), involved the Asian/Pacific Islander community (n = 8), and centered around genetic education (n = 12). Community partners most frequently were involved in recruitment (n = 12) and results analysis (n = 12) and least involved in research question development (n = 7) and product creation (n = 6). Studies varied substantially in the integration of 9 CBPR gold standard principles with only three studies addressing all nine principles. Few CBPR projects in GC services exist and a lack of guidelines to assess the quality of CBPR methodologies hindered the appraisal of studies. CBPR represents a promising approach to improve GC services and should be explored by genetics service delivery researchers.</p>","PeriodicalId":46965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Engaging communities: A scoping literature review of community-based participatory research in genetics service delivery settings.\",\"authors\":\"Heather A Zierhut, Pranathi Kandikonda, Emily M Simon, Cameron Donarski, Megan Kocher, Mariana Ramírez, Crystal Y Lumpkins, Elena R Fisher\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12687-024-00740-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Genetic counseling (GC) services have the potential to improve health outcomes, yet there are documented disparities in the use of GC services among minoritized racial/ethnic populations. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an approach to integrate diverse patient perspectives to improve GC services. The objective of this review was to assess the current state of international CBPR within GC and genetics services from 2006 to 2023. Five databases were searched for inclusion criteria: 1) published in 2006 or later; 2) peer-reviewed publication; 3) primary research studies; 4) community-based AND participatory research; 5) focused on GC, clinical genetics, testing, and/or genetic service delivery. Criteria for evaluating CBPR involvement used a synthesis of best processes framework. Screening of 3,824 studies identified 16 papers (n = 12 qualitative; n = 1 quantitative; n = 3 mixed methods). The majority of studies were conducted within the U.S. (n = 12), focused on cancer (n = 5), involved the Asian/Pacific Islander community (n = 8), and centered around genetic education (n = 12). Community partners most frequently were involved in recruitment (n = 12) and results analysis (n = 12) and least involved in research question development (n = 7) and product creation (n = 6). Studies varied substantially in the integration of 9 CBPR gold standard principles with only three studies addressing all nine principles. Few CBPR projects in GC services exist and a lack of guidelines to assess the quality of CBPR methodologies hindered the appraisal of studies. CBPR represents a promising approach to improve GC services and should be explored by genetics service delivery researchers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Community Genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Community Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-024-00740-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-024-00740-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

遗传咨询(GC)服务具有改善健康状况的潜力,但有资料显示,少数种族/族裔人群在使用遗传咨询服务方面存在差异。基于社区的参与式研究(CBPR)是一种整合不同患者观点以改善遗传咨询服务的方法。本综述旨在评估 2006 年至 2023 年期间全球癌症和遗传学服务领域的国际 CBPR 现状。根据纳入标准,我们检索了五个数据库:1) 2006 年或之后发表;2) 同行评议出版物;3) 初级研究;4) 基于社区和参与性研究;5) 侧重于 GC、临床遗传学、检测和/或遗传学服务提供。评估 CBPR 参与情况的标准采用了最佳流程综合框架。通过对 3,824 项研究的筛选,确定了 16 篇论文(定性研究 12 篇;定量研究 1 篇;混合方法研究 3 篇)。大多数研究都是在美国进行的(n = 12),重点关注癌症(n = 5),涉及亚洲/太平洋岛民社区(n = 8),并以遗传教育为中心(n = 12)。社区合作伙伴最常参与招募(12 人)和结果分析(12 人),最少参与研究问题开发(7 人)和产品创造(6 人)。各项研究在整合 9 项 CBPR 黄金标准原则方面存在很大差异,只有三项研究涉及所有 9 项原则。全球儿童保健服务领域的 CBPR 项目很少,而且缺乏评估 CBPR 方法质量的指南,这阻碍了对研究的评估。CBPR 是改进遗传学服务的一种很有前途的方法,遗传学服务提供研究人员应加以探索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Engaging communities: A scoping literature review of community-based participatory research in genetics service delivery settings.

Genetic counseling (GC) services have the potential to improve health outcomes, yet there are documented disparities in the use of GC services among minoritized racial/ethnic populations. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an approach to integrate diverse patient perspectives to improve GC services. The objective of this review was to assess the current state of international CBPR within GC and genetics services from 2006 to 2023. Five databases were searched for inclusion criteria: 1) published in 2006 or later; 2) peer-reviewed publication; 3) primary research studies; 4) community-based AND participatory research; 5) focused on GC, clinical genetics, testing, and/or genetic service delivery. Criteria for evaluating CBPR involvement used a synthesis of best processes framework. Screening of 3,824 studies identified 16 papers (n = 12 qualitative; n = 1 quantitative; n = 3 mixed methods). The majority of studies were conducted within the U.S. (n = 12), focused on cancer (n = 5), involved the Asian/Pacific Islander community (n = 8), and centered around genetic education (n = 12). Community partners most frequently were involved in recruitment (n = 12) and results analysis (n = 12) and least involved in research question development (n = 7) and product creation (n = 6). Studies varied substantially in the integration of 9 CBPR gold standard principles with only three studies addressing all nine principles. Few CBPR projects in GC services exist and a lack of guidelines to assess the quality of CBPR methodologies hindered the appraisal of studies. CBPR represents a promising approach to improve GC services and should be explored by genetics service delivery researchers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Community Genetics
Journal of Community Genetics GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: The Journal of Community Genetics is an international forum for research in the ever-expanding field of community genetics, the art and science of applying medical genetics to human communities for the benefit of their individuals. Community genetics comprises all activities which identify persons at increased genetic risk and has an interest in assessing this risk, in order to enable those at risk to make informed decisions. Community genetics services thus encompass such activities as genetic screening, registration of genetic conditions in the population, routine preconceptional and prenatal genetic consultations, public education on genetic issues, and public debate on related ethical issues. The Journal of Community Genetics has a multidisciplinary scope. It covers medical genetics, epidemiology, genetics in primary care, public health aspects of genetics, and ethical, legal, social and economic issues. Its intention is to serve as a forum for community genetics worldwide, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries. The journal features original research papers, reviews, short communications, program reports, news, and correspondence. Program reports describe illustrative projects in the field of community genetics, e.g., design and progress of an educational program or the protocol and achievement of a gene bank. Case reports describing individual patients are not accepted.
×
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