Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Aug 1;34(4):357-371.
doi: 10.1093/her/cyz018.

Integrating multiple community perspectives in intervention development

Affiliations

Integrating multiple community perspectives in intervention development

Yamilï Molina et al. Health Educ Res. .

Abstract

We offer a framework and exemplify how to integrate multiple community perspectives in research to develop breast cancer screening interventions among Latinas non-adherent to national guidelines. We leverage members of an academic institution's community consultative service [community engagement advisory board (CEAB) members]; study team members [community health workers (CHWs)] and study-eligible individuals (non-adherent Latinas). First, we asked what was needed from CEAB members (N=17), CHWs (N=14) and non-adherent Latinas (N=20) in one-time semi-structured group consultations and focus groups. Second, we drafted materials. Third, we conducted group consultations and focus groups with a new set of CEAB members (N=13), CHWs (N=17) and non-adherent Latinas (N=16) to reflect on our initial analysis and draft materials. Fourth, we finalized interventions. Certain recommendations were shared across stakeholders and simple to integrate (e.g. costs → access to free services). Some recommendations varied, but complementary integration was possible (e.g. location versus recruitment → multiple recruitment in multiple community areas). Others were distinct across stakeholders and resulted in strategies to recognize participants' agency and inform their choices about breast cancer screening (e.g. differences in preferred information about screening → personalized information and evidence about all screening options).

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Wallerstein N, Duran B.. Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: the intersection of science and practice to improve health equity. Am J Public Health 2010; 100: S40–6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Belone L, Lucero J, Duran B. et al. Community-based participatory research conceptual model: community partner consultation and face validity. Qual Health Res 2016; 26: 117–35. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jagosh J, Macaulay A, Pluye P. et al. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q 2012; 90: 311–46. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Israel B, Eng E, Schulz A. et al. Experiential learning in graduate education: development, delivery, and analysis of an evidence-based intervention. Sci Res 2005; 3: 649–57.
    1. Israel B, Krieger J, Vlahov D. et al. Challenges and facilitating factors in sustaining community-based participatory research partnerships: lessons learned from the Detroit, New York City and Seattle Urban Research Centers. J Urban Health 2006; 83: 1022–40. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types