ABSTRACT
Introduction: Community health workers and promotoras (CHW/Ps) have a fundamental role in facilitating research with communities. However, no national standard training exists as part of the CHW/P job role. We developed and evaluated a culturally- and linguistically tailored online research best practices course for CHW/Ps to meet this gap. Methods: After the research best practices course was developed, we advertised the opportunity to CHW/Ps nationwide to complete the training online in English or Spanish. Following course completion, CHW/Ps received an online survey to rate their skills in community-engaged research and their perceptions of the course using Likert scales of agreement. A qualitative content analysis was conducted on open-ended response data. Results: 104 CHW/Ps completed the English or Spanish course (n = 52 for each language; mean age 42 years SD ± 12); 88% of individuals identified as female and 56% identified as Hispanic, Latino, or Spaniard. 96%-100% of respondents reported improvement in various skills. Nearly all CHW/Ps (97%) agreed the course was relevant to their work, and 96% felt the training was useful. Qualitative themes related to working more effectively as a result of training included enhanced skills, increased resources, and building bridges between communities and researchers. Discussion: The CHW/P research best practices course was rated as useful and relevant by CHW/Ps, particularly for communicating about research with community members. This course can be a professional development resource for CHW/Ps and could serve as the foundation for a national standardized training on their role related to research best practices.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The Best Practices in Social and Behavioral Research Course was developed to provide instruction on good clinical practice for social and behavioral trials. This study evaluated the new course. METHODS: Participants across 4 universities took the course (n=294) and were sent surveys following course completion and 2 months later. Outcomes included relevance, how engaging the course was, and working differently because of the course. Open-ended questions were posed to understand how work was impacted. RESULTS: Participants rated the course as relevant and engaging (6.4 and 5.8/7 points) and reported working differently (4.7/7 points). Participants with less experience in social and behavioral trials were most likely to report working differently 2 months later. DISCUSSION: The course was perceived as relevant and engaging. Participants described actions taken to improve rigor in implementing trials. Future studies with a larger sample and additional participating sites are recommended.
