Exploring Community Engaged Research Experiences and Preferences: a Multi-level Qualitative Investigation

Overview

Journal Res Involv Engagem

Publisher Biomed Central

Date 2021 Mar 31

PMID 33785074

Citations 27

Authors

Hae-Ra Han

Ashley Xu

Kyra J W Mendez

Safiyyah Okoye

Joycelyn Cudjoe

Mona Bahouth

Melanie Reese

Lee Bone

Cheryl Dennison-Himmelfarb

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Community engagement may make research more relevant, translatable, and sustainable, hence improving the possibility of reducing health disparities. The purpose of this study was to explore strategies for community engagement adopted by research teams and identify areas for enhancing engagement in future community engaged research.

Methods: The Community Engagement Program of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research hosted a forum to engage researchers and community partners in group discussion to reflect on their diverse past and current experiences in planning, implementing, and evaluating community engagement in health research. A total of 50 researchers, research staff, and community partners participated in five concurrent semi-structured group interviews and a whole group wrap-up session. Group interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using content analysis.

Results: Four themes with eight subthemes were identified. Main themes included: Community engagement is an ongoing and iterative process; Community partner roles must be well-defined and clearly communicated; Mutual trust and transparency are central to community engagement; and Measuring community outcomes is an evolving area. Relevant subthemes were: engaging community partners in various stages of research; mission-driven vs. "checking the box"; breadth and depth of engagement; roles of community partner; recruitment and selection of community partners; building trust; clear communication for transparency; and conflict in community engaged research.

Conclusion: The findings highlight the benefits and challenges of community engaged research. Enhanced capacity building for community engagement, including training and communication tools for both community and researcher partners, are needed.

Citing Articles

Increasing capacity for ethnically-based community leaders to engage in policy change: assessing the impact of a train-the-trainer approach.

Lomeli A, Stadnick N, Cain K, Watson P, Oswald W, Broyles S BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1):968.

PMID: 40069664 PMC: 11900054. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-20822-0.

Building a diverse national research advisory board.

Valensky G, Pawelek J, Serpico L, Rodriguez D, Pieters M, Perez Y J Clin Transl Sci. 2025; 9(1):e32.

PMID: 40052054 PMC: 11883574. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2024.1169.

Supported biopsychosocial self-management for back-related leg pain: a randomized feasibility study integrating a whole person perspective.

Leininger B, Evans R, Greco C, Hanson L, Schulz C, Schneider M Chiropr Man Therap. 2025; 33(1):6.

PMID: 39910643 PMC: 11800447. DOI: 10.1186/s12998-025-00570-7.

Codeveloping a community-based, peer-led psychosocial support intervention to reduce stigma and depression among people with tuberculosis and their households in Indonesia: a mixed-methods participatory action study.

Fuady A, Anindhita M, Hanifah M, Putri A, Karnasih A, Agiananda F NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2025; 35(1):7.

PMID: 39870659 PMC: 11772848. DOI: 10.1038/s41533-024-00407-5.

Let us be heard: critical analysis and debate of collaborative research approaches used in implementation science research with equity-deserving populations.

Gallant S, Mann C, Benoit B, Aston M, Curran J, Cassidy C Implement Sci Commun. 2025; 6(1):12.

PMID: 39856795 PMC: 11762516. DOI: 10.1186/s43058-025-00695-z.

References

Salloum R, Shenkman E, Louviere J, Chambers D . Application of discrete choice experiments to enhance stakeholder engagement as a strategy for advancing implementation: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2017; 12(1):140. PMC: 5701380. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-017-0675-8. View

Silberberg M, Martinez-Bianchi V . Community and Stakeholder Engagement. Prim Care. 2019; 46(4):587-594. DOI: 10.1016/j.pop.2019.07.014. View

Ryan M . Discrete choice experiments in health care. BMJ. 2004; 328(7436):360-1. PMC: 341374. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.328.7436.360. View

Harrison J, Anderson W, Fagan M, Robinson E, Schnipper J, Symczak G . Patient and Family Advisory Councils (PFACs): Identifying Challenges and Solutions to Support Engagement in Research. Patient. 2018; 11(4):413-423. PMC: 11034744. DOI: 10.1007/s40271-018-0298-4. View

Fergusson D, Monfaredi Z, Pussegoda K, Garritty C, Lyddiatt A, Shea B . The prevalence of patient engagement in published trials: a systematic review. Res Involv Engagem. 2018; 4:17. PMC: 5963039. DOI: 10.1186/s40900-018-0099-x. View

Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T . Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci. 2013; 15(3):398-405. DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12048. View

Wennerstrom A, Springgate B, Jones F, Meyers D, Henderson N, Brown A . Lessons on Patient and Stakeholder Engagement Strategies for Pipeline to Proposal Awards. Ethn Dis. 2018; 28(Suppl 2):303-310. PMC: 6128329. DOI: 10.18865/ed.28.S2.303. View

Manafo E, Petermann L, Mason-Lai P, Vandall-Walker V . Patient engagement in Canada: a scoping review of the 'how' and 'what' of patient engagement in health research. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018; 16(1):5. PMC: 5804082. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-018-0282-4. View

Concannon T, Fuster M, Saunders T, Patel K, Wong J, Leslie L . A systematic review of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research. J Gen Intern Med. 2014; 29(12):1692-701. PMC: 4242886. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-014-2878-x. View

10.

Norris J, White D, Nowell L, Mrklas K, Stelfox H . How do stakeholders from multiple hierarchical levels of a large provincial health system define engagement? A qualitative study. Implement Sci. 2017; 12(1):98. PMC: 5540524. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-017-0625-5. View

11.

Kwon S, Tandon S, Islam N, Riley L, Trinh-Shevrin C . Applying a community-based participatory research framework to patient and family engagement in the development of patient-centered outcomes research and practice. Transl Behav Med. 2018; 8(5):683-691. PMC: 6128966. DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibx026. View

12.

Sheridan S, Schrandt S, Forsythe L, Hilliard T, Paez K . The PCORI Engagement Rubric: Promising Practices for Partnering in Research. Ann Fam Med. 2017; 15(2):165-170. PMC: 5348236. DOI: 10.1370/afm.2042. View

13.

Crocker J, Boylan A, Bostock J, Locock L . Is it worth it? Patient and public views on the impact of their involvement in health research and its assessment: a UK-based qualitative interview study. Health Expect. 2016; 20(3):519-528. PMC: 5433537. DOI: 10.1111/hex.12479. View

14.

Haynes S, Rudov L, Nauman E, Hendryx L, Angove R, Carton T . Engaging Stakeholders to Develop a Patient-centered Research Agenda: Lessons Learned From the Research Action for Health Network (REACHnet). Med Care. 2018; 56 Suppl 10 Suppl 1:S27-S32. PMC: 6143209. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000785. View

15.

Granados-Santiago M, Valenza M, Lopez-Lopez L, Prados-Roman E, Rodriguez-Torres J, Cabrera-Martos I . Shared decision-making and patient engagement program during acute exacerbation of COPD hospitalization: A randomized control trial. Patient Educ Couns. 2019; 103(4):702-708. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.12.004. View

16.

Forsythe L, Ellis L, Edmundson L, Sabharwal R, Rein A, Konopka K . Patient and Stakeholder Engagement in the PCORI Pilot Projects: Description and Lessons Learned. J Gen Intern Med. 2015; 31(1):13-21. PMC: 4700002. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-015-3450-z. View

17.

Carter-Edwards L, Grewe M, Fair A, Jenkins C, Ray N, Bilheimer A . Recognizing Cross-Institutional Fiscal and Administrative Barriers and Facilitators to Conducting Community-Engaged Clinical and Translational Research. Acad Med. 2020; 96(4):558-567. PMC: 7996237. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003893. View

18.

Skinner J, Williams N, Richmond A, Brown J, Hal Strelnick A, Calhoun K . Community Experiences and Perceptions of Clinical and Translational Research and Researchers. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2018; 12(3):263-271. PMC: 6428218. DOI: 10.1353/cpr.2018.0050. View

19.

Bowen D, Hyams T, Goodman M, West K, Harris-Wai J, Yu J . Systematic Review of Quantitative Measures of Stakeholder Engagement. Clin Transl Sci. 2017; 10(5):314-336. PMC: 5593160. DOI: 10.1111/cts.12474. View

20.

Mathie E, Wythe H, Munday D, Millac P, Rhodes G, Roberts N . Reciprocal relationships and the importance of feedback in patient and public involvement: A mixed methods study. Health Expect. 2018; 21(5):899-908. PMC: 6186542. DOI: 10.1111/hex.12684. View