Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026
Community feedback sessions: An adaptation of the community engagement studio model to enhance scalability.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Frank Simone C, Bilheimer Alicia, Datta Nixola, Grewe Mary E, Aikhuele Eseohe, Lawal Khadeejatul-Kubraa A, Kappelman Michael D
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The Community Engagement (CE) Studio is an established approach for integrating community and patient perspectives into research. Despite its widespread implementation, little information is available about how this model has been adapted across institutions to accommodate varying resources and capacities.
METHODS: The Patient and Community Engagement in Research (PaCER) Program at UNC-Chapel Hill modified the CE Studio model - with adaptations to recruitment, onboarding, virtual delivery, compensation, and session planning - resulting in the development of a new Community Feedback Session (CFS) service. This adaptation yielded a scalable model that requires fewer resources, supports capacity-building within research teams, and leverages technology. We then evaluated the CFS approach via surveys distributed to CFS attendees and researchers.
RESULTS: Between January 2022 and August 2025, we conducted 46 CFSs across 19 projects engaging 302 attendees; 149 attendees and 34 researchers completed evaluation surveys. Of these, 99% of attendees indicated they would participate again, and 97% of researchers rated the CFS service as Good or Excellent and recommended it to colleagues. Respondents appreciated the structure, facilitation, composition, and size of the sessions, and many had no suggestions for improvement. Researchers described changes they made to projects based on feedback received during CFSs, including amending study protocols, altering intervention content and delivery modalities, and revising a variety of study-related materials.
CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation data support the acceptability, feasibility, and utility of the CFS approach, indicating that this modified and scalable service accomplishes researcher goals, informs research in an impactful way, and provides value to partners.
METHODS: The Patient and Community Engagement in Research (PaCER) Program at UNC-Chapel Hill modified the CE Studio model - with adaptations to recruitment, onboarding, virtual delivery, compensation, and session planning - resulting in the development of a new Community Feedback Session (CFS) service. This adaptation yielded a scalable model that requires fewer resources, supports capacity-building within research teams, and leverages technology. We then evaluated the CFS approach via surveys distributed to CFS attendees and researchers.
RESULTS: Between January 2022 and August 2025, we conducted 46 CFSs across 19 projects engaging 302 attendees; 149 attendees and 34 researchers completed evaluation surveys. Of these, 99% of attendees indicated they would participate again, and 97% of researchers rated the CFS service as Good or Excellent and recommended it to colleagues. Respondents appreciated the structure, facilitation, composition, and size of the sessions, and many had no suggestions for improvement. Researchers described changes they made to projects based on feedback received during CFSs, including amending study protocols, altering intervention content and delivery modalities, and revising a variety of study-related materials.
CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation data support the acceptability, feasibility, and utility of the CFS approach, indicating that this modified and scalable service accomplishes researcher goals, informs research in an impactful way, and provides value to partners.