Author:
Bowen Deborah J.,Ackermann Nicole,Thompson Vetta Saunders,Nederveld Andrea,Goodman Melody
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
Engagement of relevant stakeholders’ ideas, opinions, and concerns is critical to the success of modern research projects. We have developed a tool to measure stakeholder engagement, called the Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST). The purpose of this paper is to present the implementation and uptake of the stakeholder engagement measure REST among research teams, including the assessment of barriers and facilitating factors for use of the new research engagement measure in practice.
Methods
In this implementation study, project team members participated in baseline and follow-up web-based surveys. Web-based interviews were conducted with a subset of project teams that implemented the REST. On the baseline survey, project teams were asked to provide details about up to three ongoing or recently completed projects, were asked if they agreed with compensation for REST completion, and were asked if they would like to send the survey to stakeholders or would prefer our project team to email their project stakeholders. Follow-up surveys contained questions on reactions to implementing REST and results of REST.
Results
Project team members/researchers who completed the baseline survey (n=86) were mostly female (79%) and Non-Hispanic/Latino(a) White (76%). Those who implemented REST were also mostly female (86%) and Non-Hispanic/Latino(a) White (71%), with an average of 11 years in academic research. About 98% of all participants completing the baseline survey had the capacity to survey partners, while 100% of all teams who implemented REST did. A small portion of respondents indicated the time commitment of REST would be a barrier (29% of baseline survey respondents, 10% of those who implemented REST) and indicated workload would be a barrier (31% of baseline survey respondents, 14% of those who implemented REST).
Discussion
The data presented here indicate that REST implementation is feasible in a volunteer group of ongoing research projects.
Funder
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference12 articles.
1. Goodman MS, Sanders Thompson VL. The science of stakeholder engagement in research: classification, implementation, and evaluation. Transl Behav Med. 2017;7(3):486-491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-017-0495-z
2. Goodman MS, Ackermann N, Bowen DJ, Thompson V. Content validation of a quantitative stakeholder engagement measure. J Community Psychol. 2019;47(8):1937-1951. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22239
3. Goodman MS, Ackermann N, Bowen DJ, Panel D, Thompson VS. Reaching Consensus on Principles of Stakeholder Engagement in Research. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2020;14(1):117-127. doi:https://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2020.0014
4. McCloskey DJ, McDonald MA, Cook J, et al. Community Engagement : Definitions and Organizing Concepts from the Literature. In: Principles of Community Engagement. 2nd ed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2012:41.
5. Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium Community Engagement Key Function Committee Task Force on the Principles of Community Engagement. Principles of Community Engagement. NIH Publication No. 11-7782; 2011. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/communityengagement/. Accessed 23 Jun 2021
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献