Perez Jolles Monica, Willging Cathleen, Tufte Janice, Ostendorf Danielle, Kwan Bethany M, Sevick Carter, Dorsey Holliman Brooke, Weiner Bryan J
Adult and Child Center for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science (ACCORDS), University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA
Department of General Pediatrics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
BMJ Open. 2024 Dec 20;14(12):e091966. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091966.
Cocreation, a collaborative process of key interested partners working alongside researchers, is fundamental to community-engaged research. However, the field of community-engaged research is currently grappling with a significant gap: the lack of a pragmatic and validated measure to assess the quality of this process. This protocol addresses this significant gap by developing and testing a pragmatic cocreation measure with diverse community and research partners involved in participatory health-related research. A valid measure for evaluating the quality of the cocreation process can significantly promote inclusive research practices and outcomes.
The measure consists of two components: (1) an iterative group assessment to prioritise cocreation principles and identify specific activities for achieving those principles and (2) a survey assessing individual partner experience. An expert panel of 16-20 patients, community, healthcare providers and research partners, will participate in a modified Delphi process to assist in construct delineation and assess content validity using group discussions and rating exercises. We will compute survey items using an Item-Level Content Validity Index and a modified kappa statistic to adjust for chance agreement with panel members' ratings. We will then conduct cognitive interviews with a new group of 40 participants to assess survey item comprehension and interpretation, applying an iterative coding process to analyse the data. Finally, we will assess the measure's psychometric and pragmatic characteristics with a convenience sample of 300 participants and use the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale. Construct validity will be assessed by examining survey data using confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis.
This funded study (years 2024-2025) has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Colorado, Denver. The team will share the study findings online, with key partners, and by publishing results in a peer-reviewed journal.
共同创造是关键利益相关伙伴与研究人员并肩合作的过程，是社区参与研究的基础。然而，社区参与研究领域目前正面临一个重大差距：缺乏一种实用且经过验证的方法来评估这一过程的质量。本方案通过开发和测试一种实用的共同创造评估方法来解决这一重大差距，该方法涉及参与健康相关参与式研究的不同社区和研究伙伴。一种用于评估共同创造过程质量的有效方法可以显著促进包容性研究实践和成果。
该评估方法由两个部分组成：（1）一个迭代式小组评估，用于确定共同创造原则的优先级并确定实现这些原则的具体活动；（2）一项评估个人伙伴体验的调查。一个由16 - 20名患者、社区成员、医疗保健提供者和研究伙伴组成的专家小组将参与一个改良的德尔菲过程，通过小组讨论和评分练习来协助构建界定并评估内容效度。我们将使用项目级内容效度指数和修正的kappa统计量来计算调查项目，以调整与小组成员评分的偶然一致性。然后，我们将对新的40名参与者进行认知访谈，以评估调查项目的理解和解释情况，应用迭代编码过程来分析数据。最后，我们将使用300名参与者的便利样本评估该评估方法的心理测量和实用特征，并使用心理测量和实用证据评级量表。将通过验证性和探索性因素分析来检查调查数据，以评估结构效度。
这项获得资助的研究（2024 - 2025年）已获得科罗拉多大学丹佛分校机构审查委员会的批准。研究团队将在网上与关键伙伴分享研究结果，并通过在同行评审期刊上发表结果来进行传播。
