Salsberg Jon, Macridis Soultana, Garcia Bengoechea Enrique, Macaulay Ann C, Moore Spencer
Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Kahnawake Schools Diabetes Prevention Project (KSDPP), Kahnawake, Canada.
Fam Pract. 2017 Jun 1;34(3):336-340. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmx001.
In order to maximize the benefits of community-based participatory research, effective ownership over the research process must be at least equally in the hands of the community. A previous social network analysis documented that the participatory research process shifted ownership from academic to community partners, but did not show what actions and strategies fostered this shift.
This study follows the trajectory of a community-academic partnership and asks, from the perspective of the project stakeholders, which actions and strategies over the lifespan of the research led to the observed shift in ownership and decision-making from the original external academics to the community stakeholders?
Qualitative description using inductive thematic analysis. One academic and five community stakeholders identified as central in a previous social network analysis, participated in retrospective, semi-structured interviews.
Actions deemed to have fostered the observed shift in ownership included: existence of a strong champion; stimulating 'outside' ideas; emergence of core people; alignment of project goals with stakeholders' professional roles; involving the right people; personal qualities of the champion; trust-building; and active use of participatory engagement strategies.
Although communities must take ownership over the research process to assure sustained action and change, a strong, trusted and accepted outside champion who actively enacts participatory engagement strategies can facilitate the participatory process and provide community stakeholders the time and support they need to achieve meaningful and sustained leadership roles. These findings have implications for how partnership research is designed and implemented, both in community and in clinical organisational settings.
为了使基于社区的参与性研究效益最大化，社区必须至少平等地切实掌握研究过程的主导权。先前的一项社会网络分析记录了参与性研究过程将主导权从学术伙伴转移至社区伙伴，但未表明促成这种转移的行动和策略。
本研究追踪了一个社区-学术伙伴关系的发展轨迹，并从项目利益相关者的角度提问，在研究的整个过程中，哪些行动和策略导致了观察到的主导权和决策权从最初的外部学者向社区利益相关者的转移？
采用归纳主题分析进行定性描述。一名学者和五名在先前社会网络分析中被确定为核心的社区利益相关者参与了回顾性半结构化访谈。
被认为促成了观察到的主导权转移的行动包括：有强有力的倡导者；激发“外部”想法；核心人员的出现；项目目标与利益相关者专业角色的契合；让合适的人员参与；倡导者的个人品质；建立信任；以及积极运用参与性参与策略。
尽管社区必须掌握研究过程的主导权以确保持续行动和变革，但一位积极实施参与性参与策略的强有力、值得信赖且被认可的外部倡导者可以促进参与过程，并为社区利益相关者提供他们实现有意义且持续的领导角色所需的时间和支持。这些发现对社区和临床组织环境中伙伴关系研究的设计和实施具有启示意义。
