What Lies Beneath? The Role of Community Engagement in Translating COVID-19 Research Findings to Policy-Makers
نویسندگان
1 Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
2 Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
3 Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
4 Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
5 Community Engagement Group, Optimise Study, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
6 Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
7 School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
8 Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
9 Coelho Networks, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
10 Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
11 Disease Elimination, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
12 School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
13 Community Engagement Group, Optimise Study, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
14 Disease Elimination, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
15 Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
16 Centre for Disaster Management and Public Safety, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
doi
10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8249چکیده
Background Community engagement is key to developing local and context-specific strategies for the prevention and control of COVID-19. However, expedited research design and approval in the early days of the pandemic may have limited the opportunities for community members to influence pandemic-related research. In this study, we sought to understand how a Community Engagement Group (CEG) could impact a large longitudinal COVID-19 research project (Optimise), when involved solely in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of the research. Methods Seven community members were recruited for the CEG, representing a diverse range of groups. Each month, Optimise data of topical importance were compiled into a draft report. The CEG discussed the draft report at their monthly meeting and members’ contributions were incorporated into the final report for distribution to policy-makers. In this study, a document analysis was undertaken of ten consecutive reports produced between February and November 2021. Each report was compared pre- and post- the inclusion of CEG contributions, which were then analysed using thematic analysis. Results Community engagement in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of Optimise had positive impacts on reports for policy-makers, including grounding the empirical findings in broader community perspectives, identifying policy issues affecting different groups and contributing unique insights beyond the empirical findings. Overall, the CEG contributions demonstrated the complexity of lived experience lying beneath the empirical data. Conclusion Community engagement in the translation of the Optimise findings resulted in research reports to policymakers that were reflective of a broader range of community perspectives, and that provided potential solutions to emerging policy issues related to COVID-19. This study adds to the evidence base about the impact of community engagement in the later interpretation and knowledge translation phases of research, particularly in the context of reporting to policy-makers during a public health emergency.
