Design and implementation of a Community Expert Group comprised of people with lived expertise of homelessness at an academic health research center: a program description and analysis of challenges
Ayan A Yusuf,
No information about this author
Victoria Hatfield,
No information about this author
Katherine Francombe Pridham
No information about this author
et al.
Research Involvement and Engagement,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
11(1)
Published: May 15, 2025
Abstract
The
involvement
of
communities
with
a
stake
in
healthcare
research
is
often
limited,
and
attempts
to
increase
their
participation
create
shared
decision-making
partnerships
are
hindered
by
structural
barriers.
In
this
paper,
we
describe
the
design
implementation
Community
Expert
Group
comprised
people
lived
expertise
homelessness
at
an
academic
health
center.
We
detail
group’s
model,
guiding
principles,
governance
structure,
activities,
discuss
institutional
challenges
encountered
over
course
partnership.
report
that
lack
policies
practices
institutions
support
long-term
collaboration
community
experts
makes
it
challenging
define
scope
role,
requiring
individual
teams
fill
gap.
Language: Английский
Community advisory boards as implementation strategies to center partner and patient voice in community health centers
Rebekka M. Lee,
No information about this author
Kamini Mallick,
No information about this author
James G. Daly
No information about this author
et al.
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
9(1)
Published: Dec. 18, 2024
Community
advisory
boards
(CABs)
are
a
promising
approach
for
strengthening
patient
and
partner
voices
in
community
health
center
(CHC)
evidence-based
decision-making.
This
paper
aims
to
describe
how
CHCs
used
CABs
during
the
COVID-19
pandemic
improve
reach
of
testing
among
populations
experiencing
disparities
identify
transferable
lessons
future
implementation.
mixed
methods
study
integrates
brief
quantitative
surveys
engagement
(N
=
20)
one-on-one
qualitative
interviews
13)
staff
partners
engaged
CHC
with
cost
analysis
feedback
from
participating
an
online
learning
17).
reported
high
ratings
engagement,
all
mean
principles
above
4
("very
good"
or
"often")
out
5.
Qualitative
findings
provided
more
in-depth
understanding
experiences
serving
on
CAB
highlighted
such
as
trust
mutual
respect
were
reflected
practices.
We
developed
toolkit
strategies
governance
prioritization,
estimates
ensure
sustainment,
guidance
integrating
quality
improvement
expertise,
testimonies
members
benefits
joining,
template
agendas
facilitator
training
meeting
success.
In
alignment
Translational
Science
Benefits
Model,
this
expands
research
impact
through
comprehensive
measurement
by
transforming
into
action-orientated
guide
implement
decision-making
public
impact.
Language: Английский