1 York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
2 Casey House Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Qual Health Res. 2019 Jun;29(7):1029-1042. doi: 10.1177/1049732318812773. Epub 2018 Nov 30.
Recently, scholars have begun to critically interrogate the way community participation functions discursively within community-based participatory research (CBPR) and raise questions about its function and limits. Community advisory committees (CACs) are often used within CBPR as one way to involve community members in research from design to dissemination. However, CACs may not always be designed in ways that are accessible for communities experiencing the intersections of complex health issues and marginalization. This article draws on our experience designing and facilitating Research Rec'-a flexible, and activity-based CAC for a project about the acute-care hospital stays of people living with HIV who use drugs. Using Research Rec' as a case study, we reflect on ethical, methodological, and pedagogical considerations for designing and facilitating CACs for this community. We discuss how to critically reflect on the design and facilitation of advisory committees, and community engagement processes in CBPR more broadly.
最近,学者们开始批判性地探究社区参与在基于社区的参与式研究(CBPR)中是如何发挥其话语作用的,并对其功能和局限性提出了质疑。社区咨询委员会(CAC)通常被用作将社区成员纳入从设计到传播的研究的一种方式。然而,CAC 可能并不总是以对那些面临复杂健康问题和边缘化问题的社区具有可及性的方式来设计。本文借鉴了我们在设计和促进以活动为基础的 Research Rec'方面的经验,这是一个关于使用毒品的艾滋病毒感染者急性住院治疗的项目。使用 Research Rec'作为案例研究,我们反思了为该社区设计和促进 CAC 时的伦理、方法和教学方面的考虑。我们讨论了如何批判性地反思 CBPR 中咨询委员会和社区参与过程的设计和促进。