Variation in the interpretation of scientific integrity in community-based participatory health research.
Variation in the interpretation of scientific integrity in community-based participatory health research.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.08.023
复制
发表时间：
2013-11
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Arcury, Thomas A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Diaz, Anne E. Kraemer;Johnson, Chaya R. Spears;Arcury, Thomas A.
关键词：
基于社区的参与性研究（CBPR）已成为健康差距和环境正义研究的关键；然而，CBPR项目的科学完整性已经成为一个问题。一些问题，例如适当的研究培训、缺乏获得资源和资金的机会，已经被讨论为可能限制项目的科学完整性。在了解CBPR中的科学诚信威胁之前，了解科学诚信对参与CBPR的专业和社区调查人员意味着什么是至关重要的。本研究分析了2012年美国东南部9个州的25个CBPR项目的74名专业和社区研究团队成员对CBPR科学完整性的解释。首先介绍了科学诚信的基本定义，然后探讨了在CBPR中对科学诚信的不同解释。解释的差异与团队成员作为专业调查员或社区调查员的身份有关。专业调查人员认为，CBPR的科学完整性在概念上或逻辑上都是灵活的，在平衡社区需求方面具有挑战性，或者与传统的科学完整性没有什么不同。社区调查人员将其他因素解释为科学诚信的重要因素，如信任、问责制和对社区的总体利益。本研究表明，在CBPR中对科学完整性的解释存在差异，需要对CBPR中的科学完整性进行新的定义，并考虑到所有研究者的理解和需求。
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has become essential in health disparities and environmental justice research; however, the scientific integrity of CBPR projects has become a concern. Some concerns, such as appropriate research training, lack of access to resources and finances, have been discussed as possibly limiting the scientific integrity of a project. Prior to understanding what threatens scientific integrity in CBPR, it is vital to understand what scientific integrity means for the professional and community investigators who are involved in CBPR. This analysis explores the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR among 74 professional and community research team members from of 25 CBPR projects in nine states in the southeastern United States in 2012. It describes the basic definition for scientific integrity and then explores variations in the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR. Variations in the interpretations were associated with team member identity as professional or community investigators. Professional investigators understood scientific integrity in CBPR as either conceptually or logistically flexible, as challenging to balance with community needs, or no different than traditional scientific integrity. Community investigators interpret other factors as important in scientific integrity, such as trust, accountability, and overall benefit to the community. This research demonstrates that the variations in the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR call for a new definition of scientific integrity in CBPR that takes into account the understanding and needs of all investigators.
登录
查看更多内容
基于社区的参与性研究：从儿童环境健康和疾病预防研究中心汲取的教训。
影响因子：
10.4
作者：
Israel, Barbara A;Parker, Edith A;Rowe, Zachary;Salvatore, Alicia;Minkler, Meredith;Lopez, Jesus;Butz, Arlene;Mosley, Adrian;Coates, Lucretia;Lambert, George;Potito, Paul A;Brenner, Barbara;Rivera, Maribel;Romero, Harry;Thompson, Beti;Coronado, Gloria;Halstead, Sandy
通讯作者：
Halstead, Sandy
基于社区的参与性研究从边缘走向主流：研究人员准备好了吗？
影响因子：
37.8
作者：
Horowitz, Carol R.;Robinson, Mimsie;Seifer, Sarena
通讯作者：
Seifer, Sarena
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
Savage, Christine L.;Xu, Yin;Anthony, Jean Spann
通讯作者：
Anthony, Jean Spann
影响因子：
10.4
作者：
O'Fallon LR;Dearry A
通讯作者：
Dearry A
影响因子：
10.4
作者：
Arcury, TA;Quandt, SA;Dearry, A
通讯作者：
Dearry, A