key: cord-0030645-rmypy2rl authors: Payán, DD; Zawadzki, MJ; Song, AV title: Advancing community-engaged research to promote health equity: considerations to improve the field date: 2021-10-21 journal: Perspect Public Health DOI: 10.1177/17579139211054118 sha: 08f8772891d79d5b4d9a4db147ff1f18ce5ee66c doc_id: 30645 cord_uid: rmypy2rl nan The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly increased attention and concern over health inequities that have historically plagued communities of color. Lack of quality healthcare access, housing instability, discrimination, and economic deprivation are among the numerous inequities encountered by marginalized individuals and groups with devastating interacting and cumulative impacts on their health and wellbeing. Community-engaged research (CER) has long held promise in public health as an orientation to research 1 to help address health disparities and inequities. 2 CER is an asset-based approach that shifts away from a deficit model to emphasize existing community assets, resources, and knowledge. 3 This approach can strengthen community capacity -taking into account unique historical, structural, sociopolitical, and cultural factors influencing community health. CER comes in many forms and names, including communityparticipatory partnered research, communityacademic research partnerships, and community-based participatory research (CBPR). 4 CBPR is a gold standard in CER as a collaborative approach based on principles that include fostering co-learning and capacity building for all members. 1, 5 Ideally, it equitably involves community partners and researchers in the entire research process from question identification to dissemination. 4, 6 CER is a paradigm shift to conducting science that can integrate minoritized voices and communities of color as equal collaborators -a step in the right direction to achieve health equity for all people that can be a challenging exercise in humility and openness. 5 Across all CER forms is the premise that community members and/or organizations contribute to the formation and design of research questions, approaches, and solutions. Theoretical community engagement models focus on patient/consumer involvement in developing an intervention, peer/ lay-delivered interventions, and community empowerment. 2 Examples of strategies include building partnerships and coalitions to reflect diverse perspectives, 7,8 convening a community advisory board for input, 9 and reviewing data with community members to identify interventions. 10 A wide breadth of research can benefit from a CER approach, including translational research to increase the relevance of research for communities and bridge the gap between research findings and actionable practice and policy. 7, 11 A CBPR policy approach that spans context, CBPR processes, and policy strategies can lead to equitable 1054118R SH Across all CER forms is the premise that community members and/or organizations contribute to the formation and design of research questions, approaches, and solutions CURRENT TOPICS & OPINIONS policy changes and improve health outcomes. 12 A concern around growing interest in CER is the 'dangers of co-optation as this label is loosely applied to include research and intervention efforts in search of funding that do not truly meet the criteria for this approach'. 6 Some of these criteria are process focused since CER relies on relationships, communication, and trust. There are several important challenges to consider before undertaking this type of work. First, it is a time consuming process 4 that entails developing and maintaining relationships between entities that may be unequal in power and social status. Another barrier is the misalignment between the time and effort needed to establish and maintain authentic partnerships and academic expectations for researchers to accumulate data for grant proposals or to publish peer-reviewed articles. The current climate may inadvertently promote research that treats community engagement as a transactional process for recruitmentfurther sowing distrust against research institutions and science in marginalized communities. For instance, relying on community partners as volunteers can be exploitive and unethical, particularly if there are stark differences in economic and social status between partners. These actions can further add to the long history of mistreating disenfranchised groups in the name of science. CER that is community-based is the best opportunity for the field to mitigate previous insensitivities and damage. How might we, as a field, reverse course and encourage transformative research that is critical and long in coming? A start is to be more intentional in how we describe communities. Language is powerful and can reinforce existing frameworks. Too often, the narrative in health disparities is to consider communities as 'vulnerable', which implicitly confers the quality of defenselessness or passivity and conceals the factors that led to vulnerability. We encourage shifting away from terms connoting inherent deficits and, instead, adopting language such as historically marginalized or medically underserved, which emphasize inequities due to institutional neglect and exploitation. Another step is to consider the role of CER in diversifying the research field. In addition to investing in and supporting initiatives to promote a diverse research pipeline with representation from marginalized communities, academic and research institutions need to invest and train investigators to conduct CER using published texts 1, 5, 11 and should offer fellowships and training programs for early career scholars and graduate students. Next, researchers and funders should pay careful attention to descriptions of partnerships and their collaborative processes in proposals. How will the research study involve and be of benefit to the community? Is the study aligned with the broader needs of the community? Are individuals or organizations being compensated for their time and effort (or are there clear agreements with an employer if the responsibilities are being integrated into an individual's scope of work)? What are the power and social dynamics and how do these change over the course of a project? Did partners agree to a communication plan that reflects each person's preferences? These are all fundamental questions for authentic CER that is communitybased. Finally, institutions should incentivize and reward the use of CER approaches. For instance, institutions should value CER efforts as contributions to scholarship in merit and review processes. These contributions may include translational research products (e.g. policy or research briefs) or efforts to disseminate findings to a community audience. Funders and journals can expand their aims to mention CER, solicit products focused on CER, and invite experts with CER experience to serve on editorial and review boards to signal interest and build this expertise within the scientific community. Involving the very individuals and organizations negatively impacted by inequities and health disparities in research is necessary to promote health equity. As logical as this may seem, achieving this goal requires a paradigm shift in the incentive structure and process of conducting public health research. The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported in part by a grant from the California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program (28PC-0044). The views expressed here are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the funder. Involving the very individuals and organizations negatively impacted by inequities and health disparities in research is necessary to promote health equity Community-based participatory research for health: advancing social and health equity Community engagement to reduce inequalities in health: a systematic review, meta-analysis and economic analysis Revitalising the evidence base for public health: an assets model Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health Community-based participatory research: assessing the evidence Community-based research partnerships: challenges and opportunities Defining an integrative approach for health promotion and disease prevention: a population health equity framework Putting communities at the heart of public health Taking care of yourself and your risk for breast cancer (CUIDARSE): a randomized controlled trial of a health communication intervention for Latinas access, availability, quality, and marketing practices Principles of community engagement The promise of community-based participatory research for health equity: a conceptual model for bridging evidence with policy