Minority Health and Health Equity Archive

Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/21769

Welcome to the Minority Health and Health Equity Archive (MHHEA), an electronic archive for digital resource materials in the fields of minority health and health disparities research and policy. It is offered as a no-charge resource to the public, academic scholars and health science researchers interested in the elimination of racial and ethnic health disparities.

Browse

Subject: search.filters.subject.outreach

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 144
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2012
    (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013) UNSPECIFIED
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Partnership Perspectives
    (Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, 2000) UNSPECIFIED
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America’s Future 2012
    (Trust for America's Health/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2012) Levi, Jeffrey; Segal, Laura M.; St. Laurent, Rebecca; Lang, Albert; Rayburn, Jack
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The Role of Community-Based Participatory Research to Inform Local Health Policy: A Case Study
    (2011) O'Brien, Matthew J.; Whitaker, Robert C.
    The community of health services researchers in general internalmedicine has played an important role in affecting health policy at the national and state levels. Communitybased participatory research (CBPR) offers health services researchers an opportunity to identify and address health policy questions at the local level.We present the following four mechanisms by which CBPR might increase the ability of health services researchers to impact health by informing local policy. CBPR benefits community partners by allowing them to participate directly in the research process, gives academic researchers access to local data, enhances interpretation of research findings through an understanding of local context, and provides a natural infrastructure for affecting local policy through its community partners. For each of these mechanisms, we describe one example from a CBPR project conducted by one of us (M.O.). Considering the challenges and opportunities of conducting CBPR, future efforts will help describe how this emerging research paradigm can complement traditional health services research to most effectively inform health policy at multiple levels.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    'Walking Along Beside the Researcher': How Canadian REBs/IRBs ar eResponding to the Needs of Community-Based Participatory Research
    (University of California Press, 2012) Guta, Adrian; Nixon, Stephanie; Gahagan, Jacquie; Fielden, Sarah
    research ethics boards and institutional review boards (REBs/IRBs) have been criticized for relying on conceptions of research that privilege biomedical, clinical, and experimental designs, and for penalizing research that deviates from this model. Studies that use a community-based participatory research (CBPR) design have been identified as particularly challenging to navigate through existing ethics review frameworks. However, the voices of REB/IRB members and staff have been largely absent in this debate. The objective of this article is to explore the perspectives of members of Canadian university-based REBs/IRBs regarding their capacity to review CBPR protocols. We present findings from interviews with 24 Canadian REB/IRB members, staff, and other key informants. Participants were asked to describe and contrast their experiences reviewing studies using CBPR and mainstream approaches. Contrary to the perception that REBs/IRBs are inflexible and unresponsive, participants described their attempts to dialogue and negotiate with researchers and to provide guidance. Overall, these Canadian REBs/IRBs demonstrated a more complex understanding of CBPR than is typically characterized in the literature. Finally, we situate our findings within literature on relational ethics and explore the possibility of researchers and REBs/IRBs working collaboratively to find solutions to unique ethical tensions in CBPR
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Recommendation from the Community Preventive Services Task Force for Use of Collaborative Care for the Management of Depressive Disorders
    (2012) Community Preventive Services Task Force, N/A
    The Community Preventive Services Task Force recommends collaborative care for management of depressive disorders, based on strong evidence of effectiveness in improving depression symptoms, adherence to treatment, response to treatment, and remission and recovery from depression. The widespread prevalence of depressive disorders and the large disease burden from these disorders is well established. [1] and [2] Primary care remains the most frequent point of entry into the healthcare system for patients with depression symptoms, and nearly 60% of patients with depression continue to receive care at the primary care level.3 Hence, engagement in primary care to reduce morbidity and mortality from depression would include optimizing two processes: screening and treatment. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening for depression in adults (www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsaddepr.htm) and adolescents (www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspschdepr.htm) in outpatient primary care settings, when adequate systems are in place for efficient diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up for depressive disorders.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Aligning the Goals of Community-Engaged Research: Why and How Academic Health Centers Can Successfully Engage With Communities to Improve Health
    (2012) Michener, Lloyd; Cook, Jennifer; Ahmed, Syed; Yonas, Michael A.; Coyne-Beasley, Tamera; Aguilar-Gaxiola, Sergio
    Community engagement (CE) and community-engaged research (CEnR) are increasingly viewed as the keystone to translational medicine and improving the health of the nation. In this article, the authors seek to assist academic health centers (AHCs) in learning how to better engage with their communities and build a CEnR agenda by suggesting five steps: defining community and identifying partners, learning the etiquette of CE, building a sustainable network of CEnR researchers, recognizing that CEnR will require the development of new methodologies, and improving translation and dissemination plans. Health disparities that lead to uneven access to and quality of care as well as high costs will persist without a CEnR agenda that finds answers to both medical and public health questions. One of the biggest barriers toward a national CEnR agenda, however, are the historical structures and processes of an AHC—including the complexities of how institutional review boards operate, accounting practices and indirect funding policies, and tenure and promotion paths. Changing institutional culture starts with the leadership and commitment of top decision makers in an institution. By aligning the motivations and goals of their researchers, clinicians, and community members into a vision of a healthier population, AHC leadership will not just improve their own institutions but also improve the health of the nation—starting with improving the health of their local communities, one community at a time.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The Rise in 'Recruitmentology': Clinical Research, Racial Knowledge, and the Politics of Inclusion and Difference
    (2008) Epstein, Steven
    Recent debates concerning the biomedical meaning and significance of race have paid relatively little attention to the practical implications of new policies in the US mandating the inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities (along with other ‘underrepresented groups’) as research subjects in clinical studies. I argue that pressures to enroll underrepresented groups have stimulated the development in the US of an auxiliary science I term ‘recruitmentology’: an empirical body of studies scientifically evaluating the efficacy of various social, cultural, psychological, technological, and economic means of convincing people (especially members of ‘hard-to-recruit populations’) that they want to become, and remain, human subjects. Via the filtering of social scientific frameworks into the clinical research domain, recruitmentology has promoted hybrid ways of thinking about race – awkward encounters in which depictions of race as a bounded, quasi-biological medical and administrative category sit uneasily alongside an interest in understanding racial identities and communities as sociocultural phenomena. I analyze how recruitmentologists, in addressing the mandate to recruit racially diverse subject populations, conceptualize race while simultaneously grappling with problems of trust, collective memory, and participation. I also examine how the increasingly transnational character of biomedical research is intensifying the exploitative dimensions of recruitment while further transforming the racialized character of human experimentation. This analysis