Despite being widely accepted by public health researchers and practitioners as a promising method of addressing health disparities and inequities, community-engaged research (CER) remains largely underutilized by members in the field.
In a recent article published in Perspectives in Public Health, the authors discuss the benefits and challenges of engaging in CER, as well as key considerations researchers should take into account when adopting the approach in their work.
“Community-engaged research is a framework that emphasizes the importance of community knowledge and resources while taking into account unique historical, structural, sociopolitical, and cultural factors that have influenced community health over time,” said Denise Diaz Payán, PhD, MPP, corresponding author and assistant professor of health, society, and behavior at UCI Public Health. “It represents a step in the right direction to achieve health equity for all.”
Payán and team outline four considerations for advancing CER in public health research and practice:
1. Consider how partnerships and collaborative processes are described. Investigators attempting to employ CER should ask themselves key questions like, “How will the research study involve and benefit the community?”, “How is the study aligned with the broader needs of the community?”, and “What are the power dynamics and how do we maintain equal partnership through all phases of the project?”
2. Acknowledge that language is powerful. Too often, they argue, the narrative in health disparities is to consider communities as “vulnerable” and “defenseless”. Payán and co-authors recommend being intentional about how we describe communities and adopting language – like “historically marginalized” and “medically underserved”—that emphasizes the effects of institutional neglect and exploitation on health disparities.
3. Incentivize CER at the institutional level. Payán and team note that academic and research institutions should reward CER efforts wherever possible. Considering CER in merit and review processes and inviting CER experts to serve on editorial and grant review boards are two examples they cite in their article.
4. Recognize the importance of investing in a CER-competent workforce. Academic and research institutions should invest and train investigators to conduct CER by offering fellowships, training programs, and other opportunities to early career scholars and students.
“It’s a time- and labor-intensive process, but the rewards far outweigh the challenges,” Payán emphasized. “By conducting research in a way that fosters strong relationships, effective communication, and trust, we can make lasting impacts in the health and well-being of our most socially vulnerable communities.”
Payán, who conducted the research while she was an assistant professor at UC Merced, also noted that “this is the future of the field. This is where we need to be heading.”
Co-authors included Matthew J. Zawadzki, PhD, and Anna Song, PhD, associate professors of health psychology at the School of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts at UC Merced.
