Office of Public Health Studies, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96813, USA.
Am J Public Health. 2012 Jun;102(6):1195-203. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300304. Epub 2011 Nov 28.
We examined how National Cancer Institute-funded Community Network Programs (CNPs) operationalized principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR).
We reviewed the literature and extant CBPR measurement tools. On the basis of that review, we developed a 27-item questionnaire for CNPs to self-assess their operationalization of 9 CBPR principles. Our team comprised representatives of 9 of the National Cancer Institute's 25 CNPs.
Of the 25 CNPs, 22 (88%) completed the questionnaire. Most scored well on CBPR principles of recognizing community as a unit of identity, building on community strengths, facilitating colearning, embracing iterative processes in developing community capacity, and achieving a balance between data generation and intervention. CNPs varied in the extent to which they employed CBPR principles of addressing determinants of health, sharing power among partners, engaging the community in research dissemination, and striving for sustainability.
Although the development of assessment tools in this field is in its infancy, our findings suggest that fidelity to CBPR processes can be assessed in a variety of settings.
我们考察了美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）资助的社区网络项目（CNP）如何实施基于社区的参与式研究（CBPR）的原则。
我们回顾了文献和现有的 CBPR 测量工具。在此基础上，我们为 CNP 开发了一个 27 项的自我评估问卷，以评估他们对 9 项 CBPR 原则的实施情况。我们的团队由 NIH 25 个 CNP 中的 9 个的代表组成。
在 25 个 CNP 中，有 22 个（88%）完成了问卷。大多数 CNP 在承认社区是一个身份单位、利用社区优势、促进共同学习、接受社区能力建设中的迭代过程以及在数据生成和干预之间取得平衡等 CBPR 原则方面得分较高。CNP 在多大程度上实施了 CBPR 原则，如解决健康决定因素、在合作伙伴之间分享权力、让社区参与研究传播以及努力实现可持续性，存在差异。
尽管该领域的评估工具尚处于起步阶段，但我们的研究结果表明，可以在各种环境中评估对 CBPR 过程的保真度。
