Strengthening Community Involvement in Grant Review: Insights from the Community–University Research Partnership (CURES) Pilot Review Process
Version of Record online: 23 JAN 2014
© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Clinical and Translational Science
Volume 7, Issue 2, pages 156–163, April 2014
How to Cite
Paberzs, A., Piechowski, P., Warrick, D., Grawi, C., Choate, C., Sneed, G., Carr, D., Lota, K., Key, K., Alexander, V., Ghosh, P. and Sampselle, C. (2014), Strengthening Community Involvement in Grant Review: Insights from the Community–University Research Partnership (CURES) Pilot Review Process. Clinical and Translational Science, 7: 156–163. doi: 10.1111/cts.12141
- Issue online: 28 APR 2014
- Version of Record online: 23 JAN 2014
- National Center for Research Resources. Grant Number: UL1RR024986
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Grant Number: UL1TR000433
- 1CTSA 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.
- 6CTSA Principal Investigators, , , , , , , , , , , 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): 121–129.
- 7The 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., , , , .
- 8A funding initiative for community-based participatory research: lessons from the Harvard catalyst seed grants. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2011; 5(1): 35–44., , , , , , , , , .
- 11Developing 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., , .
- 12Realizing the promise of community-based participatory research: community partners get organized! Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2007; 1(4): 291–294., .
- 13Response 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., , , .
- 15Ethical issues in health research on ethnic minority populations: Focusing on inclusion and exclusion. Res Ethics Rev. 2008; 4(1): 15–19..
- 16The role of lay panelists on grant review panels. Chronic Dis Can. 2003; 24(2–3): 70–74., .
- 17U.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): 119–136., , , , , , , , ;
- 19Guidelines 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, 419–428., , , , , , .
- 21National Cancer Institute. The NCI consumer guides for peer review Website. Available at: http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/consumer.htm. Accessed May 21, 2013.