...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Preventive Medicine >Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade
【24h】

Is Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Useful? A Systematic Review on Papers in a Decade

机译:是基于社区的参与性研究(CBPR)有用吗?十年上论文的系统评价

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been applied by health researchers and practitioners to address health disparities and community empowerment for health promotion. Despite the growing popularity of CBPR projects, there has been little effort to synthesize the literature to evaluate CBPR projects. The present review attempts to identify appropriate elements that may contribute to the successful or unsuccessful interventions. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken using evidence identified through searching electronic databases, web sites, and reference list checks. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were assessed by reviewers. Levels of evidence, accounting for methodologic quality, were assessed for 3 types of CBPR approaches, including interventional, observational, and qualitative research design as well as CBPR elements through separate abstraction forms. Each included study was appraised with 2 quality grades, one for the elements of CBPR and one for research design. Results: Of 14,222 identified articles, 403 included in the abstract review. Of these, 70 CBPR studies, that 56 intervention studies had different designs, and finally 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings show that collaboration among community partners, researchers, and organizations led to community-level action to improve the health and wellbeing and to minimize health disparities. It enhanced the capacity of the community in terms of research and leadership skills. The result provided examples of effective CBPR that took place in a variety of communities. However, little has been written about the organizational capacities required to make these efforts successful. Conclusion: Some evidences were found for potentially effective strategies to increase the participant's levels of CBPR activities. Interventions that included community involvement have the potential to make important differences to levels of activities and should be promoted.
机译:背景:基于社区的参与性研究(CBPR)已被卫生研究人员和从业者申请解决健康差异和社区赋权的健康促进。尽管越来越受CBPR项目的普及,但几乎没有努力综合文献来评估CBPR项目。本综述试图确定可能导致成功或不成功干预措施的适当元素。方法:使用通过搜索电子数据库,网站和参考列表检查来确定的证据进行系统审查。评估人员评估预定义的包含和排除标准。评估方法质量的证据级别,用于3种类型的CBPR方法,包括介入,观察和定性研究设计以及通过单独的抽象形式的CBPR元素。每个包括的研究都有2个质量等级评估,一个用于CBPR的元素,一个用于研究设计。结果:14,222名已识别的文章,403条包括在抽象审查中。其中70个CBPR研究,56个干预研究有不同的设计,最后8研究达到了纳入标准。调查结果表明,社区合作伙伴,研究人员和组织之间的协作导致社区级别行动,以改善健康和福祉,并尽量减少健康差异。它提高了社区在研究和领导技能方面的能力。结果提供了在各种社区中发生的有效CBPR的例子。但是,关于使这些努力取得成功所需的组织能力很少。结论:有些证据是为了增加参与者的CBPR活动水平的潜在有效策略。包括社区参与的干预措施有可能对活动水平进行重要差异,并应促进。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号