13 results
201 Challenges Encountered and Lessons Learned from Developing and Implementing the Michigan Research Engaging the Academy and Community in Health (M-REACH) Platform
- Part of
- Donald Vereen, Athena McKay, Tiffany Veinot, Patricia Piechowski, Polly Gipson Allen, Susan J. Woolford, Sarah Bailey
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 8 / Issue s1 / April 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 03 April 2024, p. 62
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Communities of color often report that their concerns are ignored and desire a means to facilitate effective community-academic engagement, especially during a crisis. The objective is to share lessons learned and challenges faced in the development of an online portal designed to meet this need. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR) worked with community and academics to develop an online tool, the Michigan Research Engaging the Academy and Community in Health (M-REACH) platform. The community-engaged research (CEnR) project involved conducting qualitative interviews exploring connectivity to community and academic organizations and pilot testing of the novel platform. Following development, efforts were made to implement the statewide use of M-REACH. We will report on the challenges encountered and lessons learned from development and optimization of the platform. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Authors will review the timeline of the launch of M-REACH. Steps to promote engagement of the locally developed platform to statewide utilization will be shared. Challenges encountered with scaling, matching the needs of differing communities both rural and urban, and navigating connections between remote geographies will be presented. Lessons learned and potential solutions will be discussed. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: M-REACH can connect partners by increasing understanding of the CEnR process, enhancing alignment, and building a foundation for well-functioning research partnerships. Further work is required to address the challenges encountered in development and implementation.
Developing relevant assessments of community-engaged research partnerships: A community-based participatory approach to evaluating clinical and health research study teams
- Elias Samuels, Donald Vereen, Patricia Piechowski, Athena McKay, E. Hill De Loney, Sarah Bailey, Luther Evans, Bettina Campbell, Yvonne Lewis, Ella Greene-Moton, Kent Key, DeWaun Robinson, Arlene Sparks, Ellen Champagne, Susan Woolford
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue 1 / 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 11 May 2023, e123
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background/Objective:
In 2017, the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR) and community partners in Flint, Michigan collaborated to launch a research funding program and evaluate the dynamics of those research partnerships receiving funding. While validated assessments for community-engaged research (CEnR) partnerships were available, the study team found none sufficiently relevant to conducting CEnR in the context of the work. MICHR faculty and staff along with community partners living and working in Flint used a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to develop and administer a locally relevant assessment of CEnR partnerships that were active in Flint in 2019 and 2021.
Methods:Surveys were administered each year to over a dozen partnerships funded by MICHR to evaluate how community and academic partners assessed the dynamics and impact of their study teams over time.
Results:The results suggest that partners believed that their partnerships were engaging and highly impactful. Although many substantive differences between community and academic partners’ perceptions over time were identified, the most notable regarded the financial management of the partnerships.
Conclusion:This work contributes to the field of translational science by evaluating how the financial management of community-engaged health research partnerships in a locally relevant context of Flint can be associated with these teams’ scientific productivity and impact with national implications for CEnR. This work presents evaluation methods which can be used by clinical and translational research centers that strive to implement and measure their use of CBPR approaches.
199 M-REACH: The Process of Discovering How the Academy and Community Connect to Partner in Translational Research
- Part of
- Patricia Piechowski, Meghan Spiroff, Aalap Doshi, Susan J. Woolford, Athena McKay, Karen Calhoun, Polly Y. Gipson, Erica E. Marsh
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue s1 / April 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 24 April 2023, p. 61
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To identify insights and challenges in community engaged research for the academy and community. To develop an online platform to match academic and community partners; promote networking; and provision of key resources. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Using a human-centered design approach, 19 interviews were conducted with academics, community organizations and members, and other CTSAs. The interviews focused on understanding CEnR challenges and processes in partnership formation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Findings revealed the following 10 challenges to and insights about CEnR: (1) time intensive; (2) lack of knowledge; (3) differing motivations; (4) connections occur through networking; (5) topic area, proximity, and readiness influence partnerships; (6) organizational turnover; (7) promotion pressure; (8) collaboration throughout; (9) navigator for partnership; and (10) lack of shared language. Also, a CEnR system flowchart revealed the following five phases of an effective partnership: 1) generating interest; 2) learning process; 3) connecting with the right partner; 4). Defining the research question; and 5) implementing research as a partnership. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, input from academicians and community members support the need for an online platform like M-REACH to facilitate CEnR partnerships, networking, and resources to address significant public health issues through translational research.
159 Bearing a higher burden: Black and Latinx community perspectives on the Impact of COVID-19
- Part of
- Fernanda L. Cross, Ayse G. Buyuktur, Susan J. Woolford, Susie Williamson, Sarah Bailey, Charo Ledon, Arthi Ramakrishnan, Erica E. Marsh, Barbara Israel, Jasmin Aramburu, Maria Militzer, Tiffany Cornwall, Ana Patricia Esqueda, Jodyn Platt
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue s1 / April 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 24 April 2023, p. 49
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: During earlier periods of the pandemic, Black and Latinx populations in Michigan have suffered higher rates of infection, hospitalization, and deaths when compared to Whites. We conducted this study to understand how Black and Latinx residents perceived this disproportionate burden. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In 2021, 40 semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually in English or Spanish with Black (n=24) and Latinx (n=16) residents in Michigan areas highly impacted by COVID-19: Genesee, Kent, Washtenaw, and Wayne counties. Using a Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach, we partnered with leaders from 15 community-based organizations and health and human service agencies to develop research questions, an interview protocol, and to interpret the data. We used the data analysis software Dedoose (ver 4.12) for inductive coding (IRR=0.81). This study is a part of the NIH Community Engagement Alliance (CEAL) Against COVID-19 initiative. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Participants described the significant impact of the pandemic in terms of physical and mental health, job security, and the sheer number of deaths among loved ones. They attributed the impact to comorbidities and social determinants of health disparities exacerbated by the pandemic, including income, housing, access to healthcare, as well as systemic racism. They noted being overrepresented among frontline workers with higher exposure to COVID-19, limited or misinformation about the virus, language barriers, and difficulty with social distancing. Cultural norms that promote being in close proximity, such as intergenerational households, and loss of trusted community leaders were also noted. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Findings reflect the needs of Black and Latinx community members in Michigan and the discussions they feel are important to highlight. We must work strategically with partners and the community to provide transparency and effective leadership, and prioritize addressing systemic disparities in SDoH.
161 Black and Latino Perspectives on COVID-19 Vaccines: A Mixed-methods Examination
- Part of
- Fernanda L. Cross, Ayse G. Buyuktur, Lydia Wileden, Jodyn Platt, Jeffrey Morenoff, Felix Valbuena, Sarah Bailey, Barbara Israel, Erica E. Marsh, Jasmin Aramburu, Maria Militzer, Tiffany Cornwall, Ana Patricia Esqueda, Susan J. Woolford
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue s1 / April 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 24 April 2023, p. 50
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: COVID-19 vaccines were met with both public excitement and concern. Our goal was to understand individual’s attitudes about COVID-19 vaccines within Black and Latino communities deeply impacted by COVID-19, in an effort to highlight their potential similarities and differences. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Using a community-based participatory approach, we partnered with 16 leaders from community-based organizations to conduct a mixed-methods study examining the perspectives of Black and Latino communities regarding their vaccine acceptance or hesitancy. We focused on Michigan counties highly impacted by COVID-19 infection and deaths. In 2021, we interviewed 24 Black and 16 Latino residents in English or Spanish. We combined this with survey data on vaccine attitudes and behavior from the Detroit Metro Area Communities Study (n=1,800). This research is part of the NIH Community Engagement Alliance Against COVID-19. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Qualitative and quantitative analysis highlight that Black participants expressed greater mistrust and hesitance around vaccines and less willingness to get vaccinated, often citing historical mistreatment as a contributing factor. The desire to keep themselves, their families and community safe was cited as the most important factor shaping vaccine decisions among both groups. Trust in information and in science was rated as a stronger reason for vaccination among Latinx participants; however, they also appeared to highlight the issue of vaccine access more often than Black participants. Fear of side effects and risks were equally cited as factors that influenced their vaccine hesitancy. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Despite being labeled as minority communities, these two groups have important differences regarding their perspective of COVID-19 vaccines. Our results suggest that public health interventions must be tailored to address the concerns, differences in attitudes, and beliefs among Blacks and Latinos.
480 Mentor experience with the transition to remote learning in a summer research program
- Phillip A. Ianni, Brenda L. Eakin, Susan Woolford, Christine C. Byks-Jazayeri
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 6 / Issue s1 / April 2022
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 April 2022, p. 96
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: This study examines faculty mentor experiences in a summer research program for students traditionally underrepresented in translational research. The objectives are to understand mentor perspectives of the program and how their views were impacted by the pandemic-related pivot to a remote format. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: During the summer research program, students work with a faculty mentor on an ongoing research project. Program staff pair students with diverse faculty members who share their research interests. Our program has traditionally been offered as a residential in-person program but in 2020 we moved swiftly to a fully remote learning format. Students continued to work on research projects remotely and interacted virtually with their faculty mentors. For the past five cohort years, we have collected comparable data about faculty perspectives of their program experience, which allows us to evaluate the impact of the remote format on the faculty experience compared to that of the in-person format. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: For this study, we will examine data from five cohort years (2017-2021). A survey questionnaire was administered to mentors each year at the end of the summer research program. Data were collected on faculty satisfaction with the quality and amount of student work, the amount of time students spent on their projects, and how mentors communicated with students. In 2020 and 2021, three questions were added regarding satisfaction with the remote format. Quantitative data collected from both the in-person and remote cohorts will be compared using independent samples t-tests. Select quotes from open-ended qualitative questions will be used to illustrate mentors attitudes toward the program. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study addresses a gap in the literature about summer research programs, as previous work has primarily focused on trainees. As many training programs continue to remain remote or adopt hybrid models, these results have implications for the design of similar mentored research programs.
Reimagining a summer research program during COVID: Strategies for enhancing research workforce diversity
- Brenda L. Eakin, Phillip A. Ianni, Christy Byks-Jazayeri, Vicki L. Ellingrod, Susan J. Woolford
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 6 / Issue 1 / 2022
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 28 February 2022, e37
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Well-designed, accessible short-term research training programs are needed to recruit and retain underrepresented persons into clinical and translational research training programs and diversify the workforce. The Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research developed a summer research program, training over 270 students in 15 years. In response to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, we pivoted swiftly from an in-person format to a fully remote format. We describe this process, focusing on factors of diversity, equity, and inclusion including enabling student participation in remote research activities. We collected data about students’ learning experiences since the program’s inception; therefore, we could evaluate the impact of remote vs. in-person formats. We examined data from five cohorts: three in-person (2017–2019; n = 57) and two remote (2020–2021; n = 45). While there was some concern about the value of participating in a remote format, overall students in both formats viewed the program favorably, with students in the remote cohorts rating some aspects of the program significantly more favorably. In addition, more students who identified as Black or African American participated in the remote format than in the in-person format. We describe lessons learned from this unprecedented challenge and future program directions.
4475 Meeting Partners Where They Are: Tailoring Community-Engaged Research Consultation Services
- Adam Paberzs, Patricia Piechowski, Jordan Poll, Meghan Spiroff, Karen Calhoun, Ayse Buyuktur, Athena McKay, Donald Vereen, Susan Woolford
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 4 / Issue s1 / June 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 July 2020, pp. 87-88
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: One of the most significant challenges to community engagement experienced by Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutions is inadequate capacity of academic and community partners to engage in collaborative research. Several CTSAs within the consortium provide consultation services to help address this gap. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: For over 10 years, the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR), a CTSA at the University of Michigan, has provided CEnR-specific consultations to partners seeking support for a variety of needs. Consultations can be requested for assistance with identifying potential partners, developing partnership infrastructure, finding CEnR funding opportunities, and incorporating CEnR approaches into research plans. When a consultation is requested, MICHR’s Community Engagement (CE) Program responds by planning a meeting with staff and faculty who have relevant skills, expertise, and connections. After the initial meeting, the CE Program provides follow-up communication and support based on the needs of the specific request, and often facilitates connections with potential partners. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The two most frequent types of consultation requests involve 1) making connections with potential researchers or community partner organizations, and 2) providing guidance on research grant applications that involve community engagement. MICHR provides approximately 50 CEnR consultations each year, which have resulted in development of new partnerships, grant submissions, and research projects that utilize CEnR principles and address community-identified health priorities. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This presentation will describe the evolution of MICHR’s CEnR consultation process and highlight successful outcomes and lessons learned over its 12-year history. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESCRIPTION: NA
4449 Building Capacity in the Flint Community in the Midst of the Ongoing Water Crisis
- Athena S. McKay, Adam Paberzs, Patricia Piechowski, Donald Vereen, Susan Woolford
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 4 / Issue s1 / June 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 July 2020, p. 82
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Examining the impact of the Building Capacity for Research and Action (BCRA) Award created by the Community Engagement (CE) Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR)--a Clinical & Translational Science Award (CTSA) site at the University of Michigan--in partnership with Community Based Organization Partners (CBOP). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The BCRA is a funding mechanism that supports new community-engaged research (CEnR) partnerships and projects that address community-identified health needs in Flint, Michigan. BCRA projects are required to be Flint-based and inclusive of both community and academic partners. A study section consisting of 10 MICHR-affiliated faculty and community partners reviewed proposals and made funding decisions. Funded teams were trained on Institutional Review Board (IRB) and reporting requirements by CE staff. MICHR provides support to BCRA-funded teams through monthly email correspondence with the CE Flint connector, budget review, mediation, regulatory assurance of IRB and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) requirements, coordinating six-month and final reporting, and hosting an annual stakeholder meet and greet. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In 2017, the BCRA Award submitted its first request for proposals. It received 20 applications in 2018, and selected eight awardees, providing them with a total of $60,000 in funding. Four received $5,000 for partnership development and another four received $10,000 for their research projects. The BCRA Award received 16 applications in 2019, expanding its academic pool to include the University of Chicago, U-M Flint, Michigan State University, and Michigan State University-Flint in addition to the University of Michigan. Five recipients were selected and received a total of $45,000 in funding. One was awarded $5,000 for partnership development and another four were awarded $10,000 for their research projects. MICHR has invested over $100,000 in Flint through this mechanism, which was renewed in 2019. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Each awardee presented at the annual stakeholder meet and greet. They showcased their projects with a brief overview and spoke about their expectations, lessons learned, partnership strengths and challenges, translational issues, and proposed next steps for subsequent grants, publications.
3572 The Flint Community’s Action Plan to Rebuild Trust and Encourage Resiliency During the Post Water Crisis Phase
- Karen D. Calhoun, Kent Key, E. Yvonne Lewis, Susan J Woolford, E. Hill DeLoney, Jennifer Carerra, Joe Hamm, Ella Greene-Moton, Patricia Piechowski, Kaneesha Wallace, Elder Sarah Bailey
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 3 / Issue s1 / March 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 March 2019, p. 96
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: o To review the community’s recommendations on how to rebuild trust in the Flint community. o To review effective community engagement strategies utilized with the Flint Special Projects for project conceptualization, participant recruitment, data analysis, project oversight, and dissemination. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The study population includes nearly two hundred residents representing seniors, youth and diverse ethnicities recruited to participate in eleven focus group meetings. The population also represents the general public who attended informational meetings in Flint, Michigan to learn about the crisis and allow residents to voice their opinions and concerns during the onset of the crisis. The project is a mixed methods community based participatory research effort that utilized community decision making in all phases of the effort such as pre-conception, implementation, dissemination and advocacy to encourage the community’s recommendations are adopted at policy and institutional responsiveness levels. It includes three community engaged research efforts: (project 1) A qualitative analysis of community sentiment provided during 17 recorded legislative, media and community events, and (projects 2-3) two mixed methods efforts utilizing purposive sampling of stakeholders whose voice may not have been heard. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The project presents a qualitative analysis of the community’s voice during the onset of the man-made disaster when the community first became aware of the emergency manager’s plans to switch the water source. It also reflects current perspectives of community voice since the projects are scheduled to end late February 2019. Findings from a trust measure administered to nearly two hundred residents will be presented, along with a qualitative analysis of focus group findings among segments of the population (seniors, youth, and diverse ethnicities) who may have been left out of narratives on the water crisis. Finally, the project will compare empowerment and resiliency approaches being utilized in Flint, Michigan to recover from the disaster with other approaches grounded in literature and theory. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Communities of color often experience social determinants of health which negatively impact their health, well-being and human rights. Some Flint citizens are experiencing negative health consequences (i.e., rashes, brain and behavioral sequelle, fertility, etc.) as a result of the disaster, and are uncertain of health outcomes in the future. This is the first project to rigorously document and analyze levels of trust and mistrust in the city of Flint since the water disaster occurred. The qualitative research will guide future clinical research that will benefit this traumatized community experiencing high levels of mistrust (i.e., government, elected officials, etc.). The community engaged methodology involved residents and study participants in all phases of the project including project oversight, validating and analyzing data, and dissemination. This methodology will contribute to existing literature and theory on community based participatory research, community engaged research, team science and citizen science. The approaches empowered a call to action among residents, for example, seniors who attended two senior focus group sessions shared “they are hopeful and have a purpose,” resulting in the creation of a council (with officers) at their housing complex to advocate for the well-being of seniors during the recovery process. Recruitment methodologies were extremely successful due to resident level trust in community leaders and community partner organizations. Finally, the project’s examination of approaches encouraging empowerment and resiliency will provide lessons learned for other communities challenged with crisis.
3573 Critical Barriers to Effective Community-Academic Research Partnerships and Potential Solutions
- Susan J Woolford, Ayse G. Buyuktur, Patricia Piechowski, Aalap Doshi, Erica E. Marsh
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 3 / Issue s1 / March 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 March 2019, pp. 86-87
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Background: The importance of engaging community in research and fostering community-academic research partnerships is increasingly acknowledged by Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutes. However, forming and maintaining such collaborations is often hampered by numerous challenges. It is critical to investigate the barriers to effective community-academic partnerships and to develop novel approaches to overcome these barriers. Objective: To explore community and academic perspectives of the challenges faced by community-academic research partnerships and potential solutions to these identified challenges. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Methods: In an effort to explore creative approaches to address these issues, the Community Engagement Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR), the CTSA site that serves Michigan, hosted a retreat to elicit the input of community members and academics from across the state. There was a mix of participants ranging from those with established community-academic partnerships to others who were new to community-engaged research and in early stages of forming partnerships. At the retreat, attendees were randomly divided into groups and asked to answer the specific question, “What are your barriers to partnering in research?” After each group identified a set of barriers and reported their findings to the entire room, attendees were asked to work again in their small groups to discuss potential solutions to these barriers. Ideas for solutions were also shared with the entire room. As part of the process of brainstorming about these questions, attendees were asked to document their ideas --- for both barriers and solutions --- on post-it notes which were then grouped by category. Artifacts from the retreat were saved digitally and transcripts made from these records. The findings were then analyzed to identify common themes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Results: Eighty-six participants attended the retreat from across the state of Michigan. Forty-three represented community organizations that focus on addressing a wide array of social determinants of health issues. The remaining forty-three participants represented various academic institutions. The most frequently mentioned challenges to community-academic partnerships were related to communication and relationship building. To overcome barriers in these areas, participants noted that it is critical to collaboratively and explicitly identify shared goals, values and norms in the early stages of partnership development. This was closely linked to the need for additional funding to help foster and strengthen relationships by allowing partners to spend time together to both work and socialize informally, preferably in face-to-face settings. These were deemed crucial for building trust and common ground. In addition, more equitable funding and role distribution --- including shared leadership and governance of research projects between community and academia--- that recognizes and supports the true costs of involvement in research for community members was viewed as important. Other frequently noted issues on the part of community members were the need for greater respect for community partners and for more training opportunities to build capacity within communities to participate in research. Participants from academic institutions emphasized that the current requirements and timeline for promotion in academia make it harder for them to participate in community-engaged research, especially as early career researchers. They maintained that wider recognition of the value of community-engaged research is necessary and that this requires the support of home departments. Finally, participants underscored the importance of building infrastructure to better connect potential partners from the community and academia by making it easier to identify common interests and reciprocal strengths. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Conclusion: The problems faced by community-academic partnerships may be alleviated by working with community and academic members to identify potential solutions. Further work is needed to systematically examine barriers and the efficacy of solutions to enhance community-academic partnerships. Acknowledgements: We thank all attendees of the MICHR Community Engagement retreat for their participation in this activity that explored barriers to effective community-academic partnerships. Their honest and frank feedback was essential to broaching sensitive topics related to partnership development, and to identify realistic and practical solutions. We also thank all members of the planning committee and our colleagues in the Community Engagement Program for their work on bringing together community and academic members for this retreat. This project was supported by grant number UL1TR002240 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS).
2447 Community voices first: A multi-method approach to shaping institutional response to Flint’s water crisis
- Karen D. Calhoun, Kent Key, E. Yvonne Lewis, Jennifer Carerra, Joseph Hamm, Susan Woolford, E. Hill De Loney, Ella Greene-Moten, Arlene Sparks, Don Vereen, Patricia Piechowski-Whitney, Kaneesha Wallace, Ismael Byers, Athena McKay, DeWaun Robinson, Jess Holzer, Vanessa De Danzine, Adam Paberzs, Meghan Spiroff, Erica Marsh
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 2 / Issue S1 / June 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 November 2018, pp. 66-67
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Explore perceptions of Flint stakeholders on the water crisis regarding trust and the capacity of faith and community-based organizations providing public health services to address community needs. Analyze the community’s voice shared at (1) 17 key community communications (community/congressional meetings and events), and (2) during 9 focus group sessions, in which residents, faith-based leadership and other stakeholders discuss issues and concerns on the Flint Water Crisis, and recommend ways to address them. Develop a framework that defines core theories, concepts and strategies recommended by the community to help rebuild trust and the quality of life in Flint, Michigan, and support other communities experiencing environmental stress. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Study population: faith-based leaders, seniors, youth, Hispanic/Latino and African American stakeholders, and others experiencing inequities in the city of Flint. Convene 9 focus group sessions (recorded and transcribed) to learn community perceptions on trust and ways to address it. Validate accuracy of the transcriptions with community consultants to reconcile any inaccurate information. Through a community engaged research (CEnR) process, review and analyze qualitative data from the 9 focus group sessions, and quantitative data from 2 surveys documenting (1) demographic backgrounds of focus group participants, and (2) their perceptions on trust and mistrust. Prepare a codebook to qualitatively analyze the focus group data summarizing community input on trust, mistrust, changes in service delivery among community and faith-based organizations, and ways to re-build trust in the city of Flint. Transcribe the community’s voice shared during 17 key events, identified by a team of community-academic stakeholders (i.e., UM Flint water course, congressional and community events, etc.), in which residents and other stakeholders discuss issues and concerns on the Flint Water Crisis, and recommend ways to address it. Qualitatively analyze the transcriptions, using a CEnR process to prepare a codebook on key themes from the community’s voice shared at these events, and recommendations on ways to address it. Compare and contrast findings between the two codebooks developed from (1) the focus group data and (2) qualitative analysis of community voice during public meetings and events. Synthesize this information into a framework of core theories, concepts and rebuilding strategies for Flint, Michigan. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: It is important to note many undocumented immigrant populations in Flint fear deportation and other consequences, hampering their ability to obtain service and provide community voice. Through our purposive sampling approach, we will hear from community voices not often included in narratives (i.e., seniors, youth, Hispanic/Latino residents). The presentation will present findings documenting levels of trust and mistrust in the city of Flint; and a framework of recommendations, core theories and concepts on ways to reduce, rebuild and eliminate stress that will be helpful to other communities experiencing distress. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: To our knowledge, levels of trust and mistrust in Flint have not been documented thus far. We will compare and contrast common themes presented by the community at public meetings and events with themes presented in our focus group effort on trust. Faith and community-based providers were among the first responders to the Flint Water Crisis. The effort will also share perceptions on changes in public health service delivery, and observations on preparedness for these roles that occurred among community and faith-based providers. Finally, the effort will (1) support the design of a research agenda, (2) define a framework of core theories, concepts and recommendations developed by the community to help rebuild trust in Flint, Michigan; and (3) support other communities addressing environmental distress.
Long-Term Use of Rivastigmine in Patients With Dementia With Lewy Bodies: An Open-Label Trial
- Janet Grace, Sarah Daniel, Timothy Stevens, K. K. Shankar, Zuzanna Walker, E. Jane Byrne, Susan Butler, David Wilkinson, Jan Woolford, Jonathon Waite, Ian G. McKeith
-
- Journal:
- International Psychogeriatrics / Volume 13 / Issue 2 / June 2001
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 10 January 2005, pp. 199-205
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Patients with dementia with lewy bodies (DLB) have progressive deficits in cognition, parkinsonism, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. Cholinesterase inhibitors have been used to ameliorate cognitive decline and neuropsychiatric symptoms in short-term trials. In this study, patients with DLB were treated with rivastigmine up to 96 weeks. Improvement from baseline was seen in cognitive function as measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and neuropsychiatric symptoms as measured by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) over the first 24 weeks of treatment. By 96 weeks, neither the MMSE scores nor the NPI scores were significantly worse than at baseline.