Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Proportions of practice-based research networks reporting consistent (“always” or “usually”) implementation of community engagement strategies
Tables
Cycle of Trust: Study Phase/Strategies Survey Items* Before the study Strategy 1: Trust with targeted partners 1. Build relationships with community partner based on mutual trust
2. Build relationships with practice/clinic partners based on mutual trustStrategy 2: Relevant topic and feasible study design 3. Collaborate with community partners to determine research questions and protocols
4. Choose a feasible design that places minimal burden on the clinic and its workflowThroughout the study Strategy 3: A competent research team 5. Include practice/clinic partners in the research team to ensure understanding of the clinic context
6. Involve culturally and linguistically competent community partners on the research team (eg, bilingual/bicultural) and in the community, emphasizing familiarity with cultural norms along sex and class lines and other aspects of social identityDuring the study Strategy 4: Tailored recruitment strategies 7. Create recruitment strategies tailored to specific racial/ethnic community needs (eg, arranging transportation, accessing local media, addressing citizenship status concerns) Strategy 5: Study implementation 8. Identify a person with knowledge of the study to ensure that practice/clinic partners have a contact for study-related problems Strategy 6: Tailored retention strategies 9. Use appropriately timed personal contacts (eg, culturally appropriate thank you cards for participation) and/or token material incentives (eg, gift cards) to encourage participants to complete study activities After study completion Strategy 7: Closing the loop and sowing the seeds of future research projects 10. Customize reporting of study results to the interests of practice/community partners
11. Involve clinic/community partners in presenting research results to scientific and/or public audiences↵* Response options: For each activity, respondents were asked (a) how often they plan for the activity (never, rarely, sometimes, usually, or always); (b) how often they implement the activity in their research studies (never, rarely, sometimes, usually, or always); and (c) to assess the capacity of their practice-based research network to perform each activity (very low, low, medium, high, or very high).
- Table 2. Practice-based Research Network Experience Associated With Community Engagement Activities
Cycle of Trust Scale* Responses (n) Mean (SD) Cronbach α Planning scale: “How often does your network plan each activity?” 68 42.1 (6.2) 0.70 Implementation scale: “How often does your network implement each activity?” 68 40.0 (6.2) 0.75 Capacity scale: “Rate your network's capacity to perform each activity.” 68 38.5 (7.6) 0.84 ↵* Response options: For each activity, respondents were asked (a) how often they plan for the activity (never, rarely, sometimes, usually, or always); (b) how often they implement the activity in their research studies (never, rarely, sometimes, usually, or always); and (c) to assess the capacity of their practice-based research network to perform each activity (very low, low, medium, high, or very high).
SD, standard deviation.
- Table 3. Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) Characteristics, Reported Difficulty Recruiting and Retaining a Diverse Patient Population in Research, and Experience With Community Engagement Strategies (N = 68)
PBRN Characteristics No. % PBRN age (years) <5 17 25.0 5–10 23 33.8 ≥10 28 41.2 How many publications does your PBRN have? (n) 0 (newly established) 11 16.2 1–3 8 11.8 4–10 22 32.4 >10 27 39.7 How many grants does your PBRN have? (n) 0 (newly started, no extramural grants) 6 8.8 1–3 18 26.5 4–10 20 29.4 >10 24 35.3 Geographic population served Urban only 21 30.9 Rural only 7 10.3 Both rural and urban 40 58.8 Racial communities specifically targeted for research in the past 5 years* None 12 17.6 Black or African American 39 57.4 Hispanic or Latino 38 55.9 Asian 10 14.7 Some other race/ethnicity 17 25.0 How difficult is it to recruit from diverse racial/ethnic communities? Not difficult 13 19.1 Somewhat difficult 26 38.2 Difficult 12 17.6 Very difficult 12 17.6 Don't know/not applicable 5 7.4 How difficult is it to retain participants from diverse racial/ethnic communities through the duration of the research project? Not difficult 9 13.2 Somewhat difficult 32 47.1 Difficult 8 11.8 Very difficult 7 10.3 Don't know/not applicable 12 17.6 Special populations specifically targeted for research participation*† None 15 22.1 Rural 26 38.2 Inner city 27 39.7 Low income 36 52.9 Minority 36 52.9 Underserved populations 39 57.4 Other (urban, LGBT, seniors, children) 7 10.3 PBRN has a community advisory board 20 29.4 PBRN is affiliated with a university† 37 54.4 PBRN is affiliated with a Clinical Translational Science Award† 44 64.7 - Table 4. Univariate Regression Coefficient Estimates Between Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) Characteristics, Research Experiences, and Community Engagement Strategy Implementation (N = 68)
PBRN Characteristics β PBRN age (years) <5 −0.89 5–10 −0.40 ≥10 Reference Number of publications 0.21 Number of grants −0.34 Geographic population served Urban only −2.11 Rural only 1.27 Both rural and urban Reference Racial communities specifically targeted for research in the past 5 years* Multiple racial/ethnic communities 3.41† Single community 2.63† None Reference How difficult is it to recruit from diverse racial/ethnic communities for research? Difficult or very difficult −3.57† Don't know/not applicable −3.09 Not or somewhat difficult Reference How difficult is it to retain participants from diverse racial/ethnic communities through the duration of the research project? Difficult or very difficult −3.39† Don't know/not applicable −4.75† Not or somewhat difficult Reference Number of special populations specifically targeted* 1.75† PBRN has a community advisory board 3.19† PBRN is affiliated with a university‡ −0.59 BPRN is affiliated with a Clinical Translational Science Award* 2.77† Planning scale§ 0.80† Capacity scale‖ 0.55† ↵* Response categories are not mutually exclusive.
↵† P < .20 is the criteria used for inclusion in multivariate analysis.
↵‡ Data obtained from the 2011 Agency for Health care Research and Quality PBRN Resource Center Registry; all other data were obtained from the PRIME Net Survey of PBRN directors.
↵§ How often does your network plan each activity?
↵‖ Rate your network's capacity to perform each activity.
- Table 5. Multiple linear regression models of correlates for Implementation of Recommended Community Engagement Strategies
PBRN Characteristics Model 1* Model 2† β SE β SE Retention difficulty Difficult −3.60 2.24 −1.32 1.30 Don't know/not applicable −4.33 3.01 −2.66 1.86 Minimal (reference) Recruitment difficulty Difficult −1.64 1.81 −0.10 1.02 Minimal (reference) Racial/ethnic communities targeted Single community 2.77 2.56 3.15‡ 1.46 Multiple 4.85‡ 2.23 3.43‡ 1.28 None (reference) Number of special populations targeted for research participation −0.27 0.83 −0.42 0.49 PBRN has a community advisory board 2.30 2.16 1.14 1.22 PBRN affiliated with a Clinical Translational Science Award 6.49‡ 1.91 2.78‡ 1.22 Planning scale§ Not included 0.47‡ 0.11 Capacity scale‖ Not included 0.16 0.09
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Mentoring for the Diverse Range of Family Physicians Engagement in Research
- Leveraging the Clinical Translational Science Award Network to Advance Family Medicine Research
- Bringing Parent Voices into a Pediatric Research Network Through a Virtual Parent Panel
- Parent Perceptions of and Preferences for Participation in Child Health Research: Results from a Pediatric Practice-Based Research Network
- Practitioner Participation in National Dental Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) Studies: 12-Year Results
- Future Directions for Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs): A CERA Survey
- Cohort profile: the Welsh Geriatric Registrar-Led Research Network (WeGeN): rationale, design and description
- Practice-based Research Networks at the Crossroads of Research Translation