ABSTRACT
Objective: With internal validity being a central goal of designed experiments, we seek to elucidate how community partnered participatory research (CPPR) impacts the internal validity of public health comparative-effectiveness research. Methods: Community Partners in Care (CPIC), a study comparing a community-coalition intervention to direct technical assistance for disseminating depression care to vulnerable populations, is used to illustrate design choices developed with attention to core CPPR principles. The study-design process is reviewed retrospectively and evaluated based on the resulting covariate balance across intervention arms and on broader peer-review assessments. Contributions of the CPIC Council and the study's design committee are highlighted. Results: CPPR principles contributed to building consensus around the use of randomization, creating a sampling frame, specifying geographic boundaries delimiting the scope of the investigation, grouping similar programs into pairs or other small blocks of units, collaboratively choosing random-number-generator seeds to determine randomized intervention assignments, and addressing logistical constraints in field operations. Study protocols yielded samples that were well-balanced on background characteristics across intervention arms. CPIC has been recognized for scientific merit, has drawn attention from policymakers, and has fueled ongoing research collaborations. Conclusions: Creative and collaborative fulfillment of CPPR principles reinforced the internal validity of CPIC, strengthening the study's scientific rigor by engaging complementary areas of knowledge and expertise among members of the investigative team.
Subject(s)
Community-Based Participatory Research , Comparative Effectiveness Research , Depression/therapy , Adult , Community-Based Participatory Research/methods , Community-Based Participatory Research/standards , Comparative Effectiveness Research/methods , Comparative Effectiveness Research/standards , Female , Health Services Research/organization & administration , Humans , Intersectoral Collaboration , Male , Medically Underserved Area , Public Health/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Research DesignABSTRACT
This study describes persons with serious mental illness and comorbid HIV infection and examines the effect of co-location of mental health and HIV care on satisfaction, service utilization, and appropriateness of care. One hundred and eighteen subjects completed interviews and gave blood samples; medical records were abstracted. Most reported few barriers to care and satisfaction with mental health and HIV treatment. Co-location of mental health and HIV care did not influence satisfaction with care, utilization of services, or appropriateness of care. This report challenges the notion that persons with serious mental illnesses receive inadequate health care and that they have minimal capacity for illness management. These subjects may be benefiting from increased funding for, and attention to, persons with HIV infection.
Subject(s)
HIV Seropositivity , Mental Disorders , Mental Health Services/organization & administration , Adolescent , Adult , Comorbidity , Female , HIV Seropositivity/therapy , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Los Angeles , Male , Medical Audit , Mental Disorders/therapy , Mental Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Patient Satisfaction , Severity of Illness IndexABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Violence against women, substance use and disorder, and HIV represent three significant threats to the health of women, yet little is known about the extent of these epidemics among indigent women. This study investigates and documents differences in the prevalence and co-occurrence of physical and sexual violence, substance use and disorder, and HIV risk behavior in sizable probability samples of sheltered homeless and low-income housed women. METHODS: Retrospective self-reports were obtained through structured interviews with stratified random samples of women residing in shelters (N = 460) and low-income housing (N = 438) in Los Angeles County, California. RESULTS: Sheltered women were more likely than housed women to report experiencing physical and sexual violence, substance use and disorder, HIV risk behavior, and co-occurrence of these problems in the past year. Differences remained when propensity weights were used to equate the groups on demographic and background characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest remarkable need for services among communities of indigent women. Higher rates of problems among women in shelters highlight the importance of differentiating among subgroups of indigent women in community-based prevention and intervention activities and tentatively suggest a protective influence of housing.
