Search

Translational research needs to show value through impact on measures that matter to the public, including health and societal benefits. To this end, the Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) identified four categories of impact: Clinical, Community, Economic, and Policy. However, TSBM offers limited guidance on how these areas of impact relate to equity. Central to the structure of our Center for American Indian and Alaska Native Diabetes Translation Research are seven regional, independent Satellite Centers dedicated to community-engaged research. Drawing on our collective experience, we provide empirical evidence about how TSBM applies to equity-focused research that centers community partnerships and recognizes Indigenous knowledge. For this special issue - "Advancing Understanding and Use of Impact Measures in Implementation Science" - our objective is to describe and critically evaluate gaps in the fit of TSBM as an evaluation approach with sensitivity to health equity issues. Accordingly, we suggest refinements to the original TSBM Logic model to add: 1) community representation as an indicator of providing community partners "a seat at the table" across the research life cycle to generate solutions (innovations) that influence equity and to prioritize what to evaluate, and 2) assessments of the representativeness of the measured outcomes and benefits., Competing Interests: All authors declare they have no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

This paper presents a case example of the Native-CHART Training Evaluation and describes the process of planning and administering a paper evaluation during the Native-CHART symposium in November 2019 led by the Center for Native American Health (CNAH) and an external evaluator. Training evaluation methodologies and the data collection instrument were grounded in the Health Belief Model (HBM) where health-related chronic disease and risk factor knowledge translates to perceived susceptibility, benefits, barriers, and self-efficacy. Kirkpatrick's Four-level Training Evaluation Model explored learning, reaction, behaviors, and results. The evaluation aims centered around the following questions: 1)Who attended the symposium, and why did they attend? 2)What knowledge did participants gain at the symposium? 3)Will attendees change their behaviors as a result of attending the symposium? 4) What parts of the symposium were most valuable? And 5) How can the symposium be improved? Data collected at the symposium answered these questions. After the Native-CHART symposium, CNAH staff and the external evaluator met to reflect on the steps necessary to plan and implement a participatory training evaluation. From these discussions, eight steps emerged. This paper presents these steps along with recommendations for future work. Participatory and collaborative approaches in training evaluation and the steps included in this case example may be useful to evaluators, communities, and programs working on designing and evaluating various trainings with Tribal populations., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

American Indian (AI) and Alaska Native (AN) community stakeholder engagement has the power to transform health research. However, the engagement and dissemination process is challenging in AIAN communities due to the historical and current negative experiences of AIAN populations in health research (Dillard et al., 2018). Whereas there is a paucity of recommendations about how to engage stakeholders in health research, from agenda-setting to proposal development, study design, recruitment, data collection, analysis, results, and dissemination (Concannon et al., 2014), there is limited information about how these recommendations are operationalized within the context of AIAN health research and practice (Concannon et al., 2014; Forsythe et al., 2016). For the purposes of this article, stakeholders are individuals, organizations, or communities who have a direct interest in the process and outcomes of a project, research, or policy effort (Boaz et al., 2018). Stakeholder engagement is a systematic process involving stakeholders, which provides opportunities for consultation, input, reviews, reactions, support, and assistance with dissemination. Dissemination focuses on how, when, by whom, and under what circumstances evidence spreads throughout agencies, organizations, states, counties, communities, tribes, researchers, policy makers, and service organizations.

Purpose and Objectives: American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) hypertension contributes to cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of premature death in this population. The purpose of this article is to document strategies, concerns, and barriers related to hypertension and cardiovascular disease from Native-Controlling Hypertension and Risks through Technology (Native-CHART) symposiums facilitated by the Center for Native American Health (CNAH). The objectives of this evaluation were to combine Health Needs Assessment (HNA) data and explore barriers and strategies related to hypertension while assessing changes in participants' perspectives over time (2017-2021)., Approach: CNAH followed an iterative process each year for planning the HNA, facilitating the HNA, and refining and reflecting on HNA findings over time. This involved 3 interconnected steps: (1) developing a shared understanding for the HNA, "Why are we here?," (2) facilitating the HNA during annual symposiums "What do we do?," and (3) reflecting on "What did we learn?"., Evaluation Methods: Data were collected using a culturally centered HNA co-created by the CNAH team and tribal partners. Qualitative data analysis utilized a culturally centered thematic approach and NVivo software version 12.0. Quantitative data analysis included summarizing frequency counts and descriptive statistics using Microsoft Excel., Results: Over the 5-year period, 212 Native-CHART symposium participants completed HNAs. Data collected from HNAs show persistent barriers and concerns and illuminate potential strategies to address AI/AN hypertension. Future efforts must explore effective strategies that build on community strengths, culture and traditions, and existing resources. This is the path forward., Implications for Public Health: CNAH's culturally centered and unique HNA approach helped assess participant perspectives over time. CNAH facilitated symposiums over multiple years, even amid a global pandemic. This demonstrates resilience and continuity of community outreach when it is needed the most. Other universities and tribal partners could benefit from this iterative approach as they work to design HNAs with tribal populations.