Kennedy Caitlin, Vogel Amanda, Goldberg-Freeman Clara, Kass Nancy, Farfel Mark
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2009 Jun;4(2):3-16. doi: 10.1525/jer.2009.4.2.3.
ACADEMIC FACULTY MEMBERS ARE increasingly following community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles. We conducted qualitative, in-depth interviews with 22 Johns Hopkins faculty members who conduct community-based research to understand their experiences and perspectives. Respondents engaged the community in numerous ways, ranging from working with community advisory boards to hiring community members as project staff to collaborating with community members across all phases of research. Challenges included defining "community," ensuring adequate community representation, sharing power with community partners, overcoming an institutional history of strained community-academic relationships, and working within existing academic incentive structures. Despite these challenges, respondents generally felt their experiences conducting research with community participation were positive and successful. Policy changes at funding and academic institutions and an emphasis on the similarities between CBPR and ethical principles could improve support for CBPR approaches.
学术教员越来越多地遵循基于社区的参与式研究（CBPR）原则。我们对22位约翰·霍普金斯大学从事社区研究的教员进行了定性、深入访谈，以了解他们的经历和观点。受访者通过多种方式与社区合作，从与社区咨询委员会合作到聘请社区成员为项目工作人员，再到在研究的各个阶段与社区成员协作。挑战包括界定“社区”、确保社区有足够的代表性、与社区伙伴分享权力、克服机构历史上紧张的社区与学术关系，以及在现有的学术激励结构内开展工作。尽管存在这些挑战，但受访者普遍认为他们在社区参与下进行研究的经历是积极且成功的。资助机构和学术机构的政策变化以及对CBPR与伦理原则之间相似性的强调，可能会改善对CBPR方法的支持。
