Community Engagement in Research: Frameworks for Education and Peer Review

Community engagement in research may enhance a community''s ability to address its own health needs and health disparities issues while ensuring that researchers understand community priorities. However, there are researchers with limited understanding of and experience with effective methods of engaging communities. Furthermore, limited guidance is available for peer-review panels on evaluating proposals for research that engages communities.The National Institutes of Health Director''s Council of Public Representatives developed a community engagement framework that includes values, strategies to operationalize each value, and potential outcomes of their use, as well as a peer-review framework for evaluating research that engages communities.Use of these frameworks for educating researchers to create and sustain authentic community–academic partnerships will increase accountability and equality between the partners.THE SIGNIFICANT RENAISSANCE of community engagement in research stems from demands by community leaders, policymakers, and funders for meaningful community involvement to address health problems facing communities. The published peer-reviewed literature and numerous reports point to the many potential benefits of community engagement in research.^1–16 According to the Institute of Medicine, for example, community-based participatory research increases community understanding of the issues under study and enhances researchers'' ability to understand community priorities, the importance of addressing community priorities, and the need for culturally sensitive communications and research approaches.¹⁷Several models for community engagement in research exist, including community-based participatory research,^18,19 empowerment evaluation,^20,21 participatory or community action research,²² and participatory rapid appraisal.²³ Some confusion exists about the definition of community engagement in research, however, because many researchers use the terms interchangeably.Researchers conducting community engagement in research need appropriate education and training not typically offered by traditional doctoral and master''s level curricula. The field clearly needs long-term programs that integrate the knowledge and skills of experienced community and researcher partners in high-quality participatory research to build the capacity of young and traditionally trained researchers and scientists interested in pursuing community engagement in research.²⁴Funding agencies often find it difficult to assess participatory research proposals, especially if they use traditional review criteria that are not necessarily applicable to participatory research.²⁵ A 2004 review²⁶ points out that when reviewers in typical study sections are not familiar with community-based participatory research or are even skeptical about the approach''s merits, investigators find it challenging to obtain funding for their community-based participatory research projects through conventional peer-review mechanisms.Many funders include members of the lay public in their peer-review panels to evaluate proposals from the patient''s or family member''s perspective.^27,28 Lay public reviewers help scientists understand the impact of the research on the community and help them make appropriate funding recommendations that address the needs and concerns of patients, health care providers, and family members.²⁹ However, many scientists are concerned that lay peer reviewers do not have the scientific expertise required to offer an appropriate evaluation.^30,31 A survey of the National Cancer Institute of Canada''s scientific grant review panel members found that not all scientists value lay contributions and many lay members feel insecure about the importance of their contributions.³²Because of these barriers, community engagement in research is probably underused. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director''s Council of Public Representatives (COPR), a federal advisory committee to the NIH director, addressed these issues and produced this article to advance community engagement in research. We describe approaches that funders and educational institutions can use to develop community engagement in research training programs and peer-review processes that can expand the community engagement in research field.