» Articles » PMID: 31723673

Identifying 'hard-to-reach' Groups and Strategies to Engage Them in Biomedical Research: Perspectives from Engagement Practitioners in Southeast Asia

Overview
Date 2019 Nov 15
PMID 31723673
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Public or community engagement (PE/CE) is an increasingly important component of biomedical research. However, PE/CE projects have been criticized for focusing on the 'convenient sample' populations that are more accessible and more likely to respond, thus missing out the less-socially visible groups. In January 2018, engagement practitioners from across Southeast Asia, attending a regional workshop, undertook a discussion about the 'hard-to-reach' populations in the region, and how PE projects can better engage them.  This paper is a summary of that discussion. After an initial brainstorming exercise the hard-to-reach populations identified by workshop participants were broadly categorised into three groups: urban poor, ethnic minority groups and children in rural primary schools. Delegates identified common characteristics of the populations and possible interventions to reach them. Notes of the discussions were used as data for the report. Four common issues that become barriers for engagement were identified: (1) financial instability; (2) mobility in residency and work; (3) discrimination and isolation; and (4) limitations in local resources. It is important to recognise that a group might be more disadvantaged by one factor than the others, but often these issues inter-relate to restrict outreach. In order to engage these populations, a tailor-made programme, that suits the local context, should be created. This can be done through four strategies that have the acronym 'FIND': (1) Formative research to improve understanding of the population; (2) Integrating into local life; (3) Networking with relevant stakeholders; and (4) Developing local resources.  Our discussion highlights the importance of a deep understanding of the local contexts in order to implement relevant and acceptable engagement projects. Findings from this report may be useful for planning public engagement projects in similar settings.

Citing Articles

Public involvement and engagement in scientific research and higher education: the only way is ethics?.

Nollett C, Eberl M, Fitzgibbon J, Joseph-Williams N, Hatch S Res Involv Engagem. 2024; 10(1):50.

PMID: 38822417 PMC: 11140937. DOI: 10.1186/s40900-024-00587-x.


Opportunities for incorporating intersectionality into biomedical informatics.

Bear Dont Walk 4th O, Paullada A, Everhart A, Casanova-Perez R, Cohen T, Veinot T J Biomed Inform. 2024; 154:104653.

PMID: 38734158 PMC: 11146624. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104653.


Participant recruitment among vulnerable populations: An experience from a qualitative study among refugee adolescents in Germany.

Mohammadzadeh M, Taras A, Stock C Open Res Eur. 2023; 2:47.

PMID: 37974661 PMC: 10652035. DOI: 10.12688/openreseurope.14654.2.


What works to recruit general practices to trials? A rapid review.

Buckley D, McHugh S, Riordan F HRB Open Res. 2023; 6:13.

PMID: 37753269 PMC: 10518848. DOI: 10.12688/hrbopenres.13650.1.


Evaluation of feasibility and acceptability of a web-based diabetes prevention program (DPP) for diabetes risk reduction in Chinese Americans in New York City.

Yeh M, Lau W, Keady C, Horlyck-Romanovsky M, Tung H, Hu L Front Public Health. 2023; 11:1199746.

PMID: 37333528 PMC: 10272575. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1199746.


References
1.
Maung Lwin K, Cheah P, Cheah P, White N, Day N, Nosten F . Motivations and perceptions of community advisory boards in the ethics of medical research: the case of the Thai-Myanmar border. BMC Med Ethics. 2014; 15:12. PMC: 3929312. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6939-15-12. View

2.
Silva D, Smith M, Upshur R . Disadvantaging the disadvantaged: When public health policies and practices negatively affect marginalized populations. Can J Public Health. 2013; 104(5):e410-2. PMC: 6974166. DOI: 10.17269/cjph.104.3895. View

3.
Cyril S, Smith B, Possamai-Inesedy A, Renzaho A . Exploring the role of community engagement in improving the health of disadvantaged populations: a systematic review. Glob Health Action. 2015; 8:29842. PMC: 4685976. DOI: 10.3402/gha.v8.29842. View

4.
Cheah P, Newton P, Mayxay M . The first Science Café in Laos. Lancet. 2016; 388(10052):1376. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31742-1. View

5.
OMara-Eves A, Brunton G, Oliver S, Kavanagh J, Jamal F, Thomas J . The effectiveness of community engagement in public health interventions for disadvantaged groups: a meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2015; 15:129. PMC: 4374501. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-1352-y. View