CAB Domains of Engagement

The recent emphasis by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute and other funding agencies on stakeholder participation in research design, methodology and outcomes assessment has increased pressure to explore and define processes for optimal engagement of stakeholders as active members of specific research projects or as community researchers. The community academic resources for engaged scholarship (CARES) group at UNC Chapel Hill has been a leader in this work through our direct involvement with CABs7-9 and by providing consultation to research groups interested in working with CABs.

To advance our understanding of the dynamics of working with CABs, a qualitative exploratory study was undertaken using focus groups with members of ten research teams in which we had established CABs to guide their work. The data collected were analyzed using thematic analysis. Key themes included:

Finding time for meetings was the most challenging aspect of working with CABs. Most groups reported that finding a meeting time that worked for all members was difficult, particularly in multiyear studies. Some groups used video conferences to meet with members, but many found that these were not as effective as face-to-face meetings in building relationships and developing trust. Many CABs experienced some turnover of members over time, and it was important to develop a plan for how to replace members, including training new members.

While some CAB members were very involved in research design and implementation, others remained primarily engaged in the community or public health aspects of the project. These were often the more vocal and visible members of the CAB, and their contributions were valued. However, it was also helpful to have a small number of less visible members who could provide critical perspective and support.

The results of this study CAB 도메인 suggest that CABs can be categorized into five domains: (1) Respect, (2) Resources, (3) Roles and (4) Responsibilities and Requirements. While the exact nature of these domains may vary between CABs, these domains serve as a valuable framework for planning and evaluating CAB-based research.

In a future article, we will describe the impact of these strategies and methods on the outcome measures and metrics used to assess the success of CAB-based research. By assessing the impact of these approaches, it will be possible to move beyond descriptions and begin to test the hypothesis that CAB-based research leads to improved health outcomes. Until then, we invite other research and funding agencies to consider how they can leverage these lessons learned in their own engagement with CABs.