首页> 外文期刊>Progress in community health partnerships: research, education, and action >External community review committee: A new strategy for engaging community stakeholders in research funding decisions
【24h】

External community review committee: A new strategy for engaging community stakeholders in research funding decisions

机译:外部社区审查委员会:一种新战略,旨在使社区利益相关者参与研究资金的决策

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Major gaps exist between what we know and what we do in clinical practice and community health programs and narrowing this gap will require substantive partnerships between academic researchers and the communities they serve. Objectives: We describe a research pilot award program that makes a unique commitment to community engagement through the addition of an External Community Review Committee to the typical research review process that gives external stakeholders decision-making power over research funding. Methods: Whereas engaging community reviewers in discussion and rating of research proposals is not novel, the ICTR ECRC review process is distinct in that it is subsequent to peer review and uses different criteria and methodology. This method of engagement allows for the community review panel to re-rank scientifically meritorious proposals-such that proposals funded do not necessarily follow the rank order from scientific peer review. The approach taken by UW ICTR differs from those discussed in the literature that present a model of community-academic co-review. Results: This article provides guidance for others interested in this model of community engagement and reviews insights gained during the evolution of this strategy; including how we addressed conflict, how the committee was able to change the pilot award program over time, and individual roles that were crucial to the success of this approach. Conclusions: The advantages of this approach include success through traditional academic metrics while achieving an innovative shared-power mechanism for community engagement which we believe is critical for narrowing the gap between knowledge and practice.
机译:背景:我们在临床实践和社区健康计划中所知与所做之间存在巨大差距,而要缩小这一差距,则需要学术研究人员与其所服务社区之间建立实质性合作伙伴关系。目标:我们描述了一项研究试点奖励计划,该计划通过在典型的研究审查过程中增加外部社区审查委员会来做出对社区参与的独特承诺,该委员会赋予外部利益相关者对研究资金的决策权。方法:尽管让社区评审员参与研究建议的讨论和评级并不新颖,但卢旺达问题国际法庭的ECRC评审过程却截然不同,因为它是在同行评审之后进行的,并使用不同的标准和方法。这种参与方式允许社区评审小组对科学上有建树的建议进行重新排名-这样资助的建议就不必遵循科学同行评审的排名顺序。 UW ICTR采取的方法不同于文献中讨论的方法,文献中提供了社区-学术共同审查的模型。结果:本文为对这种社区参与模式感兴趣的其他人提供了指导,并回顾了在该策略发展过程中获得的见解;包括我们如何解决冲突,委员会如何随着时间的推移更改试点奖励计划以及对这种方法的成功至关重要的个人角色。结论:这种方法的优势包括通过传统的学术指标获得成功,同时实现了创新的社区参与共享动力机制,我们认为这对于缩小知识与实践之间的差距至关重要。

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