What should community organisations consider when deciding to partner with researchers? A critical reflection on the Zilla Budakattu Girijana Abhivrudhhi Sangha experience in Karnataka, India
- PMID: 32912247
- PMCID: PMC7488535
- DOI: 10.1186/s12961-020-00617-6
What should community organisations consider when deciding to partner with researchers? A critical reflection on the Zilla Budakattu Girijana Abhivrudhhi Sangha experience in Karnataka, India
Abstract
Background: Community organisations and community members are increasingly being involved in health research projects worldwide as part of the engagement movement. Achieving deeper forms of community engagement like partnership demands that decision-making power be shared with community partners. However, how can community partners assess if meaningful engagement and shared decision-making will be possible when approached by prospective research partners? In this paper, we explore how community organisations decide to join health research projects when approached by health researchers.
Methods: Case study research was undertaken on a health systems research project in Karnataka, India called Participation for Local Action, which was carried out by local researchers in partnership with the Zilla Budakattu Girijana Abhivrudhhi Sangha, a community development organisation. In-depth interviews were conducted with the researchers, Sangha leaders and field investigators from their community.
Results: Thematic analysis identified two main themes - 'context' and 'deciding to engage'. The Sangha's experience offers lessons to other community organisations that can help them when deciding to engage with researchers in terms of what features to look for in research partners and in proposed research projects, what requests to make of prospective research partners, and what sorts of outcomes or partnership agreements to accept. These lessons may be especially applicable in contexts where relationships of trust already exist between partners and where they have the skills to lead data collection and analysis.
Conclusions: We hope that this guidance will help empower community organisations to select good research partners and promote more equitable partnerships between community partners and academic researchers.
Keywords: collaboration; community organisation; engagement; ethics; health research; health systems research; partnership; power.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have not derived any financial interests or benefits from the direct applications of this research. Two of the paper’s co-authors were investigators on the health systems research project that is the focus of the case study in this paper. However, we believe that the nature of their involvement was not of a kind to raise concerns about the validity of study findings.
Similar articles
-
Overcoming structural barriers to sharing power with communities in global health research priority-setting: Lessons from the Participation for Local Action project in Karnataka, India.Glob Public Health. 2022 Dec;17(12):3334-3352. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2022.2058048. Epub 2022 Mar 31. Glob Public Health. 2022. PMID: 35358014 Free PMC article.
-
How is inclusiveness in health systems research priority-setting affected when community organizations lead the process?Health Policy Plan. 2022 Aug 3;37(7):811-821. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czac012. Health Policy Plan. 2022. PMID: 35284932 Free PMC article.
-
Exploring the "how" in research partnerships with young partners by experience: lessons learned in six projects from Canada, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Nov 17;8(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00400-7. Res Involv Engagem. 2022. PMID: 36397131 Free PMC article.
-
The Bidirectional Engagement and Equity (BEE) Research Framework to Guide Community-Academic Partnerships: Developed From a Narrative Review and Diverse Stakeholder Perspectives.Health Expect. 2024 Aug;27(4):e14161. doi: 10.1111/hex.14161. Health Expect. 2024. PMID: 39087753 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A review of reviews on principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts of research partnerships approaches: a first step in synthesising the research partnership literature.Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 May 25;18(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-0544-9. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020. PMID: 32450919 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Exploring Community Mental Health Systems - A Participatory Health Needs and Assets Assessment in the Yamuna Valley, North India.Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022 Jan 1;11(1):90-99. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2020.222. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022. PMID: 33300767 Free PMC article.
-
"We're already doing this work": ethical research with community-based organizations.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Sep 2;22(1):237. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01713-7. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022. PMID: 36056309 Free PMC article.
-
Telephony and trade-offs in fieldwork with the 'unreached': on the conduct of telephonic interviews with indigenous study participants in southern India.BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Aug;6(Suppl 5):e006261. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006261. BMJ Glob Health. 2021. PMID: 34353815 Free PMC article.
-
Response to correspondence article on the research protocol titled Towards Health Equity and Transformative Action on tribal health (THETA) studyto describe, explain and act on tribal health inequities in India: A health systems research study protocol.Wellcome Open Res. 2023 Apr 4;8:155. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.19190.1. eCollection 2023. Wellcome Open Res. 2023. PMID: 37766856 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Reynolds L, Sariola S. The ethics and politics of community engagement in global health research. Crit Public Health. 2018;28(3):257–268. doi: 10.1080/09581596.2018.1449598. - DOI
-
- Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences . International ethical guidelines for healthrelated research involving humans. Geneva: CIOMS; 2017.
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources