The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Participatory Approaches for Study Design and Analysis in Dissemination and Implementation Research
Abstract
This chapter seeks to demonstrate the value added from community participation to the research process itself. It shows how Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) methods are useful in the dissemination and implementation (D&I) of research findings and some of the lessons from CBPR for D&I research. It discusses challenges that can play out in participatory research, followed by a more detailed examination of the specific ways in which a CBPR approach can enhance the D&I of research findings through collaborative design, analysis, dissemination, and research translation. A case study of a community-university-health department CBPR project that endeavored to study and improve the health and working conditions of restaurant workers in San Francisco's Chinatown District is presented. Then, some of the methods used to involve all partners in study design, data analysis, and translation of findings into action, as well as some of the benefits of doing so, are discussed. Finally, key lessons learned, through this and other CBPR efforts, are shared, and their implications for improving the breadth and effectiveness of the critical dissemination and implementation phases of research are summarized.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In community-based participatory research designs, patients are involved directly as partners in the research process.
“In fact, in community-based participatory research designs, patients are involved directly as partners in the research process [36,37].”
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chaudoir, S. R., Dugan, A. G., & Barr, C. H. (2013) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-22 · Cited by 800
Brownson, R. C., Jacobs, J. A., Tabak, R. G., Hoehner, C. M., & Stamatakis, K. A. (2013) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2012.301165 · Cited by 316
Cabassa, L. J., & Baumann, A. A. (2013) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-90 · Cited by 290
Parker, L. J., Marx, K. A., Nkimbeng, M., Johnson, E., Koeuth, S., Gaugler, J. E., & Gitlin, L. N. (2023) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/gnac120 · Cited by 60
Stanick, C. F., Halko, H. M., Dorsey, C. N., Weiner, B. J., Powell, B. J., Palinkas, L. A., & Lewis, C. C. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3709-2 · Cited by 54
Ramanadhan, S., Minsky, S., Martinez-Dominguez, V., & Viswanath, K. (2017) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s13142-017-0488-y · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Minkler, M., & Salvatore, A. L.
- Venue
- Dissemination and Implementation Research in HealthTranslating Science to Practice
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2012-03-29
- Pages
- 192-212
- OpenAlex
- W2485527276
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 26.00
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Community Health and Development
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Education › Service-Learning and Community Engagement
- Keywords
- community-based participatory research, dissemination and implementation research, research translation, community participation, university-community collaboration, restaurant employees, working conditions, lessons learned
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
