Integrating community-based participatory research and informatics approaches to improve the engagement and health of underserved populations.
Integrating community-based participatory research and informatics approaches to improve the engagement and health of underserved populations.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/jamia/ocv094
复制
发表时间：
2016-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Veinot TC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Unertl KM;Schaefbauer CL;Campbell TR;Senteio C;Siek KA;Bakken S;Veinot TC
我们比较了5个应用社区参与式研究（CBPR）方法的健康信息学研究项目，目的是扩展现有的CBPR原则，以解决健康信息学研究的具体问题。我们对5个不同的案例研究进行了交叉案例分析，其中有一个共同的元素：将CBPR方法整合到卫生信息学研究中。在审查了出版物和其他病例相关材料后，所有共同作者都参与了以CBPR为重点的协作讨论。研究人员将每个病例映射到现有的CBPR框架，单独检查每个病例的成功因素和障碍，并确定了病例之间的共同模式。结果将CBPR方法应用于所有病例的卫生信息学研究的好处包括：开展更相关、影响更广泛的研究，更多地参与不同人群，提高内部效度，更快地将研究转化为行动，以及人的发展。将CBPR应用于卫生信息学研究的挑战包括需要发展强有力的、可持续的学术社区伙伴关系，以及与文化和时间因素有关的不匹配。我们的分析还提出了若干与技术有关的挑战，包括需要确定技术产出的所有权和与社区伙伴建立技术能力。最后，我们创建了几个原则，扩展了现有的CBPR框架，以专门解决卫生信息学研究需求。我们的跨案例分析为健康信息学研究中CBPR的实施提供了有价值的见解，并确定了对未来基于CBPR的研究有用的宝贵经验。应用CBPR方法的好处可能是巨大的，特别是在吸引通常得不到保健服务的人群和设计面向患者的技术方面。
Objective We compare 5 health informatics research projects that applied community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches with the goal of extending existing CBPR principles to address issues specific to health informatics research. Materials and methods We conducted a cross-case analysis of 5 diverse case studies with 1 common element: integration of CBPR approaches into health informatics research. After reviewing publications and other case-related materials, all coauthors engaged in collaborative discussions focused on CBPR. Researchers mapped each case to an existing CBPR framework, examined each case individually for success factors and barriers, and identified common patterns across cases. Results Benefits of applying CBPR approaches to health informatics research across the cases included the following: developing more relevant research with wider impact, greater engagement with diverse populations, improved internal validity, more rapid translation of research into action, and the development of people. Challenges of applying CBPR to health informatics research included requirements to develop strong, sustainable academic-community partnerships and mismatches related to cultural and temporal factors. Several technology-related challenges, including needs to define ownership of technology outputs and to build technical capacity with community partners, also emerged from our analysis. Finally, we created several principles that extended an existing CBPR framework to specifically address health informatics research requirements. Conclusions Our cross-case analysis yielded valuable insights regarding CBPR implementation in health informatics research and identified valuable lessons useful for future CBPR-based research. The benefits of applying CBPR approaches can be significant, particularly in engaging populations that are typically underserved by health care and in designing patient-facing technology.