Publications
IWRI
Publications
2016
Lucero, J.; Wallerstein, N.; Duran, B.; Alegria, M.; Green-Moton, E.; Israel, B.; Kastelic, S.; Magarati, M.; Oetzel, J.; Pearson, C.; Schulz, A.; M. & White Hat Villegas, E. R.
Development of a Mixed Methods Investigation of Process and Outcomes of Community-Based Participatory Research Journal Article
In: Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2016.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Duran B, Magarati M., Pearson C. R., Schultz K.
@article{Lucero2016,
title = {Development of a Mixed Methods Investigation of Process and Outcomes of Community-Based Participatory Research},
author = {Lucero, J. and Wallerstein, N. and Duran, B. and Alegria, M. and Green-Moton, E. and Israel, B. and Kastelic, S. and Magarati, M. and Oetzel, J. and Pearson, C. and Schulz, A. and Villegas, M. & White Hat, E.R.},
url = {http://mmr.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/02/24/1558689816633309.abstract},
doi = {10.1177/1558689816633309},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-02-26},
journal = {Journal of Mixed Methods Research},
abstract = {This article describes a mixed methods study of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership practices and the links between these practices and changes in health status and disparities outcomes. Directed by a CBPR conceptual model and grounded in indigenous-transformative theory, our nation-wide, cross-site study showcases the value of a mixed methods approach for better understanding the complexity of CBPR partnerships across diverse community and research contexts. The article then provides examples of how an iterative, integrated approach to our mixed methods analysis yielded enriched understandings of two key constructs of the model: trust and governance. Implications and lessons learned while using mixed methods to study CBPR are provided.},
keywords = {Duran B, Magarati M., Pearson C. R., Schultz K.},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article describes a mixed methods study of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership practices and the links between these practices and changes in health status and disparities outcomes. Directed by a CBPR conceptual model and grounded in indigenous-transformative theory, our nation-wide, cross-site study showcases the value of a mixed methods approach for better understanding the complexity of CBPR partnerships across diverse community and research contexts. The article then provides examples of how an iterative, integrated approach to our mixed methods analysis yielded enriched understandings of two key constructs of the model: trust and governance. Implications and lessons learned while using mixed methods to study CBPR are provided.
