Evaluation of Participatory Health Research
Background Framework:
Through evaluation strategies, we seek to understand the added value and benefit of participatory practices for improving health outcomes. We seek to know which practices contribute to effective academic-community (and other stakeholder) partnerships, and what are the facilitators and barriers to this effectiveness. We seek to know the range of outcomes or impacts participatory health research can influence, whether they are specific research outcomes, greater community capacities, or greater capacities of academic institutions to engage in partnership with community.
Evaluation, just like every other aspect of participatory health research, does not take place in a vacuum. Each partnership exists within a local and national context, including political and socio-economic trends; cultural values and knowledge; histories of trust or mistrust based on previous research relationships; and whether or not the problem chosen is a priority within the community. Participatory practices are also complex and are based on relationships as well as structural agreements or mutually accepted guidelines for engagement.
Core Evaluation Questions:
The core evaluation question therefore is: “under what conditions, do which participatory strategies, contribute to what kind of outcomes?”
Many sets of questions fall under this key question. Examples include:
Through evaluation strategies, we seek to understand the added value and benefit of participatory practices for improving health outcomes. We seek to know which practices contribute to effective academic-community (and other stakeholder) partnerships, and what are the facilitators and barriers to this effectiveness. We seek to know the range of outcomes or impacts participatory health research can influence, whether they are specific research outcomes, greater community capacities, or greater capacities of academic institutions to engage in partnership with community.
Evaluation, just like every other aspect of participatory health research, does not take place in a vacuum. Each partnership exists within a local and national context, including political and socio-economic trends; cultural values and knowledge; histories of trust or mistrust based on previous research relationships; and whether or not the problem chosen is a priority within the community. Participatory practices are also complex and are based on relationships as well as structural agreements or mutually accepted guidelines for engagement.
Core Evaluation Questions:
The core evaluation question therefore is: “under what conditions, do which participatory strategies, contribute to what kind of outcomes?”
Many sets of questions fall under this key question. Examples include:
|
|
Existing PHR evaluations:
Belone, L., Lucero, JE., Duran, B., Tafoya, G., Baker, EA., Chan, D., Chang, C., Greene-Moton, E., Kelley, M., Wallerstein, N. Community-Based Participatory Research Conceptual Model: Community Partner Consultation and Face Validity, Qualitative Health Research, published online 31 October 2014, DOI: 10.1177/1049732314557084.
Hicks S, Duran B, Wallerstein N, Avila M, Belone L, Lucero J,,Magarati, M., Mainer, E., Muhammad, M., Oetzel, J., Pearson, C., Sahota, Pl, Simonds, V., Sussman, A., Tafoya, G., White Hat, E., Evaluating community-based participatory research to improve community-partnered science and community health. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 2012; 6(3): 289-99.
Lucero JE, Wallerstein N. Trust in community-academic research partnerships: Increasing the consciousness of conflict and trust development. In: Ting-Toomey S, Oetzel J, editors. Sage Conflict of Communications. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2013. p. 537-563.
Oetzel JG, Villegas M, Zenone H, White Hat E, Wallerstein, N., Duran, B. Governance of community-engaged research: Exploring the associations of final approval with processes and outcomes. American Journal of Public Health, in press.
Oetzel, J., Zhou, C., Duran, B., Pearson, C., Magarati, M., Wallerstein, N. Establishing the Psychometric Properties of Constructs in a Community-Based Participatory Research Conceptual Model, American Journal of Health Promotion; published first on-line, 2014, DOI: 10.4278/ajhp.130731-QUAN-398.
Pearson C.R, Duran, B., Magarati, M., Oetzel, J., Zhou, C., Lucero, J., Villegas, M., Wallerstein, N. (2015) “Research for Improved Health: Variability and Impact of Structural Characteristics in Federally- funded Community Engaged Research Studies.” Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 9 (1).
Sandoval, JA, Lucero, J; Oetzel, J; Avila, M; Belone, L; Mau, M; Pearson, C., Tafoya, G; Duran, B., Rios, LI, Wallerstein, N., Process and outcome constructs for evaluating community-based participatory research projects: a matrix of existing measures. Health Education Research 2012;27(4):680-690.
Wallerstein N, Oetzel J, Duran B, Belone L, Tafoya G, Rae R. What predicts outcomes in CBPR? In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N, editors. Community Based Participatory Research for Health: From Process to Outcomes. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2008. p. 371-392.
Belone, L., Lucero, JE., Duran, B., Tafoya, G., Baker, EA., Chan, D., Chang, C., Greene-Moton, E., Kelley, M., Wallerstein, N. Community-Based Participatory Research Conceptual Model: Community Partner Consultation and Face Validity, Qualitative Health Research, published online 31 October 2014, DOI: 10.1177/1049732314557084.
Hicks S, Duran B, Wallerstein N, Avila M, Belone L, Lucero J,,Magarati, M., Mainer, E., Muhammad, M., Oetzel, J., Pearson, C., Sahota, Pl, Simonds, V., Sussman, A., Tafoya, G., White Hat, E., Evaluating community-based participatory research to improve community-partnered science and community health. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 2012; 6(3): 289-99.
Lucero JE, Wallerstein N. Trust in community-academic research partnerships: Increasing the consciousness of conflict and trust development. In: Ting-Toomey S, Oetzel J, editors. Sage Conflict of Communications. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2013. p. 537-563.
Oetzel JG, Villegas M, Zenone H, White Hat E, Wallerstein, N., Duran, B. Governance of community-engaged research: Exploring the associations of final approval with processes and outcomes. American Journal of Public Health, in press.
Oetzel, J., Zhou, C., Duran, B., Pearson, C., Magarati, M., Wallerstein, N. Establishing the Psychometric Properties of Constructs in a Community-Based Participatory Research Conceptual Model, American Journal of Health Promotion; published first on-line, 2014, DOI: 10.4278/ajhp.130731-QUAN-398.
Pearson C.R, Duran, B., Magarati, M., Oetzel, J., Zhou, C., Lucero, J., Villegas, M., Wallerstein, N. (2015) “Research for Improved Health: Variability and Impact of Structural Characteristics in Federally- funded Community Engaged Research Studies.” Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 9 (1).
Sandoval, JA, Lucero, J; Oetzel, J; Avila, M; Belone, L; Mau, M; Pearson, C., Tafoya, G; Duran, B., Rios, LI, Wallerstein, N., Process and outcome constructs for evaluating community-based participatory research projects: a matrix of existing measures. Health Education Research 2012;27(4):680-690.
Wallerstein N, Oetzel J, Duran B, Belone L, Tafoya G, Rae R. What predicts outcomes in CBPR? In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N, editors. Community Based Participatory Research for Health: From Process to Outcomes. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2008. p. 371-392.