Community engagement strategies to promote recruitment and participation in clinical research among rural communities: A narrative review.

Residents of rural areas are underrepresented in research. The aim of this narrative review was to explore studies describing the effectiveness of community engagement strategies with rural communities to promote participant recruitment and participation in clinical research. Following PRISMA guidelines, this narrative review was conducted in June 2020. Our search strategy was built around keywords that included community-engaged research, rural community, and recruitment strategies into clinical research. Content-related descriptive statistics were summarized. The selected articles were distributed into categories of levels of community engagement: inform, consult, involve, collaborate, or co-lead. The search resulted in 2,473 identified studies of which forty-eight met inclusion criteria. Of these, 47.1% were randomized controlled trials. The most common levels of engagement were consultation (n = 24 studies) and collaboration (n = 15), while very few focused on informing (n = 2) and co-leadership (n = 2). Strategies, limitations, and findings are discussed for each level of community engagement. This narrative addressed a gap in knowledge regarding participant recruitment in rural communities in relation to assistance from community members. Community engagement contributed to the success of the research, especially in recruitment, participation, and building trust and partnership.

Development of novel home-based tampon sampling for endometrial cancer: findings from community-based focus groups with Black and White women.

Novel endometrial cancer (EC) early-detection approaches may reduce racial disparities in mortality. We conducted six community-based focus groups with White and Black women (N = 57 participants) in February-March 2020 to explore acceptability of a home-based tampon sampling approach for EC. Participants also completed a survey. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Awareness of EC and risk factors was low. Acceptability regarding home sampling was high, but participants expressed concerns about instruction complexity and potential risks. Black women reported lower comfort with tampons. Increasing EC awareness, self-efficacy, and familiarization with tampons would advance prospects for at-home sample collection for EC testing.

Researchers' experiences working with community advisory boards: How community member feedback impacted the research.

INTRODUCTION: To assess researchers' experiences working with community advisory boards (CABs) and perceptions of how community member stakeholder feedback impacted the research. METHODS: Individual interviews were conducted with researchers (n= 34) who had presented their research to a Mayo Clinic CAB (at MN, AZ, or FL) from 2014 to 2017, with an average interview duration of 10-15 min. Researchers were asked "In what ways did the feedback you received from the CAB influence your research?" A validated, structured, 7-item interview was used to assess domains of the potential influence that CABs had on the research: (1) pre-research (e.g., generated ideas), (2) infrastructure (e.g., budget preparation), (3) research design, (4) implementation (e.g., research recruitment), (5) analysis, (6) dissemination, and (7) post-research. A total mean score was calculated with a possible range of 0-7. In addition, open-ended examples and feedback from researchers in response to each domain were summarized for themes using content analysis. RESULTS: Researchers reported that the CAB influenced research in the following domains: pre-research (24%), infrastructure (24%), study design (41%), implementation (41%), analysis (6%), dissemination (24%), and post-research activities (18%). The mean total score was = 1.8 (SD = 1.7, range: 0-6). Open-ended responses revealed major themes of CAB helpfulness in generating/refining ideas, identifying community partners, culturally tailored and targeted recruitment strategies, intervention design and delivery, and dissemination. CONCLUSION: Findings from this preliminary evaluation indicate that despite positive experiences noted in open-ended feedback, the perceived quantitative impact of CAB feedback on the research was moderate. Bidirectional communication between researchers and community member stakeholders has the potential to make clinical and translational research more relevant and appropriate.