Understanding the evolution of trust in a participatory health research partnership: A qualitative study.
community-based participatory research
participatory health research
qualitative
social networks
trust
Journal
Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy
ISSN: 1369-7625
Titre abrégé: Health Expect
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9815926
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Nov 2023
29 Nov 2023
Historique:
revised:
03
11
2023
received:
23
05
2023
accepted:
12
11
2023
medline:
30
11
2023
pubmed:
30
11
2023
entrez:
30
11
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Advancements in evaluating the impact of participatory health research (PHR) have been made through comprehensive models like the community-based participatory research (CBPR) conceptual model, which provides a useful framework for exploring how context and partnership processes can influence health research design and interventions. However, challenges in operationalising aspects of the model limit our understanding and evaluation of the PHR process. Trust is frequently identified as an important component of the CBPR model, which supports the development of key partnership outcomes, such as partnership synergy. However, trust continues to be limited to a binary view (as present or absent), which is problematic given its inherently dynamic and temporal nature. The aim of this qualitative study is to understand the evolution of trust in the national public and patient involvement (PPI) network in Ireland. Participants from the PPI network (n = 15/21) completed a semistructured interview discussing the evolution of trust by reviewing four social network maps derived from a previous longitudinal study. Following Braun and Clarke, we used reflexive thematic analysis, to iteratively develop, analyse and interpret our mediated reflection of the data. Participants described the evolution of trust as a function of three contextual factors: (1) the set-up and organisation of the network, (2) how people work together and (3) reflection on the process and outcomes. Their descriptions across these themes seemed to vary depending on partnership type with National Partners and Site Leads having more opportunities to demonstrate trust (e.g., via leadership roles or more resources), compared to Local. Thus, visibility and the opportunity to be visible, depending on the set-up and organisation of the network and how people work together, seemingly play an important role in the evolution of trust over time. Based on these findings, we provide important questions for reflection across themes that could be considered for future PHR partnerships. Given that the opportunity and visibility to build and maintain trust over time may not be equally available to all partners, it is important to find ways to invest in and commit to equitable relationships as the key to the success (i.e., longevity) of partnerships. We reflect on/offer important implications for those engaging in PHR partnerships and those who fund such research. A Research Advisory Group comprising four research partners (representing academic, service and community organisations) from the PPI Ignite Network provided input and approval for the research objectives of this study as well as previously published work informing this study. Informal consultation occurred with members of this group to discuss findings from this study, assisting with the way findings are presented and described, to be accessible for diverse audiences. Two Research Advisory Group members were involved in the interpretation of the results, and one is a co-author of this manuscript (Zoe Hughes).
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : University of Limerick
ID : GEMS-10
Organisme : CIHR Foundation Grant: Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network
ID : FDN#143237
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel JG, Minkler M. Community-Based Participatory Research for Health: Advancing Social and Health Equity. John Wiley & Sons; 2017.
Cargo M, Mercer SL. The value and challenges of participatory research: strengthening its practice. Annu Rev Public Health. 2008;29:325-350.
International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR). Position Paper No. 3 Impact in Participatory Health Research. ICPHR; 2020.
International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR). Position Paper 1: What is Participatory Health Research?. ICPHR Berlin; 2013.
Oetzel JG, Springett J, Wallerstein N, et al. Evaluating participatory health research: voices from around the world. In: Wright MT, Kongats K, eds. Participatory Health Research. Springer; 2018:25-40.
Jagosh J, Macaulay AC, Pluye P, et al. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q. 2012;90(2):311-346.
Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, et al. A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):725.
Lucero JE, Boursaw B, Eder MM, Greene-Moton E, Wallerstein N, Oetzel JG. Engage for equity: the role of trust and synergy in community-based participatory research. Health Educ Behav. 2020;47(3):372-379.
Lucero JE, Wright KE, Reese A. Trust development in CBPR partnerships. In: Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel JG, Minkler M, eds. Community-Based Participatory Research for Health: Advancing Social and Health Equity. Jossey-Bass; 2017:61-76.
Armstrong A, Flynn E, Salt K, et al. Trust and temporality in participatory research. Qual Res. 2022;23(4):1000-1021.
Lewicki RJ, Brinsfield C. Trust research: measuring trust beliefs and behaviours. In: Lyon F, Möllering G, Saunders MNK, eds. Handbook of Research Methods on Trust. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2015:46-64.
Lyon F, Möllering G, Saunders M. Introduction. Researching trust: the ongoing challenge of matching objectives and methods. In: Lyon F, Möllering G, Saunders MNK, eds. Handbook of Research Methods on Trust. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited; 2015:1-22.
Blumberg BF, Peiró JM, Roe RA. Trust and social capital: challenges for studying their dynamic relationship. In: Lyon F, Möllering G, Saunders MNK, eds. Handbook of Research Methods on Trust. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2015:86-96.
Valente TW. Social Networks and Health: Models, Methods, and Applications. Oxford University Press; 2010.
Wasserman S, Faust K. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press; 1994.
Gilfoyle M, MacFarlane A, Salsberg J. Conceptualising, operationalising, and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review. Syst Rev. 2022;11(1):40.
Gilfoyle M, Salsberg J, McCarthy M, MacFarlane A, MacCarron P. Exploring the multidimensionality of trust in participatory health partnerships-a network approach. Front Public Health. 2022;10:925402.
Burt RS. Network items and the general social survey. Soc Netw. 1984;6(4):293-339.
Clarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis: a practical guide. In: Maher A, ed. Thematic Analysis. SAGE Publications; 2021:1-100.
Braun V, Clarke V. To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qual Res Sport Exercise Health. 2021;13(2):201-216.
Gilfoyle M. (2023). Defining, measuring and influencing trust in participatory health research partnerships. Thesis. University of Limerick; 2023. https://doi.org/10.34961/researchrepository-ul.24533293.v1
Archer M, Bhaskar R, Collier A, Lawson T, Norrie A. Critical Realism: Essential Readings. Routledge; 2013.
Fletcher AJ. Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. Int J Soc Res Methodology. 2017;20(2):181-194.
Danermark B, Ekström M, Karlsson JC. Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences. Routledge; 2019.
Morgan J. Critical realism for a time of crisis? Buch-Hansen and Nielsen's twenty-first century CR: Critical Realism: Basics and Beyond, by Hubert Buch-Hansen and Peter Nielsen. Macmillan. J Crit Realism. 2021;20(3):300-321
Buys T, Casteleijn D, Heyns T, Untiedt H. A reflexive lens on preparing and conducting semi-structured interviews with academic colleagues. Qual Health Res. 2022;32(13):2030-2039.
Probst B. Both/and: researcher as participant in qualitative inquiry. Qual Res J. 2016;16:149-158.
Gilfoyle M, MacFarlane A, Hannigan A, Niranjan V, Hughes Z, Salsberg J. The public and patient involvement imperative in Ireland: building on policy drivers. Front Public Health. 2022;10:1038409.
PPI Ignite Network. About us. 2022. Accessed November 22, 2023. https://ppinetwork.ie/about-us/
Salsberg J, Macridis S, Garcia Bengoechea E, Macaulay AC, Moore S. The shifting dynamics of social roles and project ownership over the lifecycle of a community-based participatory research project. Fam Pract. 2017;34(3):305-312.
Braun V, Clarke V. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qual Res Psychol. 2021;18(3):328-352.
Krackhardt D. Constraints on the interactive organization as an ideal type. In: Cross R, Parker A, Sasson L, eds. Networks in the Knowledge Economy. Oxford University Press, Inc; 2003:324-335.
Schutz A, Luckmann T. The Structures of the Life-World. Northwestern University Press; 1973.
Borgatti SP, Ofem B. Social network theory and analysis. Social Network Theory and Educational Change. In: Daly AJ, ed. Harvard Education Press; 2010:17-29.
Lachance L, Coombe CM, Brush BL, et al. Understanding the benefit-cost relationship in long-standing Community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships: findings from the measurement approaches to partnership success (MAPS) study. J Appl Behav Sci. 2022;58(3):513-536.
Connected Communities. Community-Based Participatory Research: Ethical Challenges. Community Research Team, Centre for Social Justice and Community; 2011.
Lyon F, Mšllering G, Saunders MN. Handbook of Research Methods on Trust. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2015.
Wallerstein N, Oetzel JG, Sanchez-Youngman S, et al. Engage for equity: a long-term study of community-based participatory research and community-engaged research practices and outcomes. Health Educ Behav. 2020;47(3):380-390.
Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, Becker AB. Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19(1):173-202.
Oetzel JG, Villegas M, Zenone H, White Hat ER, Wallerstein N, Duran B. Enhancing stewardship of community-engaged research through governance. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(6):1161-1167.
Anggraeni M, Gupta J, Verrest HJLM. Cost and value of stakeholders participation: a systematic literature review. Environ Sci Policy. 2019;101:364-373.
Rodrigues FA. Network centrality: an introduction. In: Macau EEE, ed. A Mathematical Modeling Approach From Nonlinear Dynamics to Complex Systems. Springer; 2019:177-196.
Moore de Peralta A, Smithwick J, Torres ME. Perceptions and determinants of partnership trust in the context of community-based participatory research. J Health Disparities Res Pract. 2020;13(1):4.
Kastelic SL, Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel JG. Socio-ecologic framework for CBPR. In: Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel JG, Minkler M, eds. Community-Based Participatory Research for Health: Advancing Social and Health Equity. Jossey-Bass; 2017:77.
Coombe CM, Schulz AJ, Guluma L, et al. Enhancing capacity of community-academic partnerships to achieve health equity: results from the CBPR partnership academy. Health Promot Pract. 2020;21(4):552-563.