SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    CTSA Community Engagement Key Function Committee and CTSA Community Engagement Workshop Planning Committee. Researchers and their communities: The challenge of meaningful community engagement. Duke University. 2009. Available at: https://ctsacorus.org/resources/273/download/Monograph-ResearchersTheir_Communities-CTSA-2007-08_3.pdf. Accessed May 13, 2013.
  • 2
    Israel B, Schulz A, Parker E, Becker A. Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998; 19(1): 173202.
  • 3
    Sadler LS, Larson J, Bouregy S, Lapaglia D, Bridger L, McCaslin C, Rockwell S. Community–university partnerships in community-based research. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2012; 6(4): 463469.
  • 4
    Sadler LS, Newlin KH, Johnson Spruill I, Jenkins C. Beyond the medical model: interdisciplinary programs of community engaged health research. Clin Transl Sci. 2011; 4(4): 285297.
  • 5
    Ross LF, Loup A, Nelson RM, Botkin JR, Kost R, Smith GR Jr, Gehlert S. Human subjects protections in community-engaged research: a research ethics framework. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2010; 5(1): 517.
  • 6
    CTSA Principal Investigators, Shamoon H, Center D, Davis P, Tuchman M, Ginsberg H, Califf R, Stephens D, Mellman T, Verbalis J, Nadler L, et al. Preparedness of the CTSA's structural and scientific assets to support the mission of the national center for advancing translational sciences (NCATS). Clin Transl Sci. 2012; 5(2): 121129.
  • 7
    Frechtling J, Raue K, Michie J, Miyaoka A, Spiegelman M. The CTSA national evaluation final report. Rockville, MD: Webstat, 2012. Available at: https://www.ctsacentral.org/sites/default/files/files/CTSANationalEval_FinalReport_20120416.pdf Accessed May 7, 2013.
  • 8
    Tendulkar SA, Chu J, Opp J, Geller A, Digirolamo A, Gandelman E, Grullon M, Patil P, King S, Hacker K. A funding initiative for community-based participatory research: lessons from the Harvard catalyst seed grants. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2011; 5(1): 3544.
  • 9
    Winckler E, Brown J, LeBailly S, McGee R, Bayldon B, Huber G, Kaleba E, Lowry KW, Martens J, Mason M, et al. A novel program trains community-academic teams to build research and partnership capacity. Clin Transl Sci. 2013; 6(3): 214221.
  • 10
    Main D, Felzien M, Magid DJ, Calonge BN, O'Brien RA, Kempe A, Nearing K. A community translational research pilot grants program to facilitate community–academic partnerships: lessons from Colorado's clinical translational science awards. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2012; 6(3): 381387.
  • 11
    Seifer S, Shore N, Holmes S. Developing and sustaining community-university partnerships for health research: infrastructure requirements. Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. 2003. Available at: http://ccph.memberclicks.net/assets/Documents/FocusAreas/infrastructurerequirements.pdf. Accessed May 15, 2013.
  • 12
    Seifer S, Greene-Moton E. Realizing the promise of community-based participatory research: community partners get organized! Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2007; 1(4): 291294.
  • 13
    Palermo A, Park A, Seifer S, Ybarra V. Response to NOD-07–074 – the NIH peer review process. Community Partner Summit Policy Workgroup. 2007. Available at: http://ccph.memberclicks.net/assets/Documents/FocusAreas/responsenihpeerreviewprocesssept7.pdf Accessed May 16, 2013.
  • 14
    Killien M, Bigby JA, Champion V, Fernandez-Repollet E, Jackson RD, Kagawa-Singer M, Kidd K, Naughton MJ, Prout M. Involving minority and underrepresented women in clinical trials: the national centers of excellence in women's health. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2000; 9(10): 10611070.
  • 15
    Bhopal R. Ethical issues in health research on ethnic minority populations: Focusing on inclusion and exclusion. Res Ethics Rev. 2008; 4(1): 1519.
  • 16
    Monahan A, Stewart D. The role of lay panelists on grant review panels. Chronic Dis Can. 2003; 24(2–3): 7074.
  • 17
    Andejeski Y, Breslau ES, Hart E, Lythcott N, Alexander L, Rich I, Bisceglio I, Smith HS, Visco FM; U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Fiscal Year 1995 Breast Cancer Research Program Integration Panel. Benefits and drawbacks of including consumer reviewers in the scientific merit review of breast cancer research. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2002; 11(2): 119136.
  • 18
    Ahmed S, Palermo A. Community engagement in research: frameworks for education and peer review. Am J Public Health. 2010; 100(8): 13801387.
  • 19
    Green LW, George MA, Daniel M, Frankish CJ, Herbert CP, Bowie, WR, O'Neill M. Guidelines for participatory research in health promotion. In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N, eds. Community-Based Participatory Research for Health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 2003, 419428.
  • 20
    Minkler M, Blackwell A, Thompson M, Tamir H. Community-based participatory research: implications for public health funding. Am J Public Health. 2003; 93(8): 12101213.
  • 21
    National Cancer Institute. The NCI consumer guides for peer review Website. Available at: http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/consumer.htm. Accessed May 21, 2013.
  • 22
    Wilkins CH, Spofford M, Williams N, McKeever C, Allen S, Brown J, Opp J, Richmond A, Strelnick AH. Community representatives’ involvement in clinical and translational science awardee activities. Clin Transl Sci. 2013; 6(4): 292296.
  • 23
    Michener L, Cook J, Ahmed SM, Yonas MA, Coyne-Beasley T, Aguilar-Gaxiola S. Aligning the goals of community-engaged research: why and how academic health centers can successfully engage with communities to improve health. Acad Med. 2012; 87(3): 285291.