Search

University Libraries play a crucial role in moving towards Open Science, contributing to more transparent, reproducible and reusable research. The Center for Digital Scholarship (CDS) at Leiden University (LU) library is a scholarly lab that promotes open science literacy among Leiden's scholars by two complementary strategies: existing top-down structures are used to provide training and services, while bottom-up initiatives from the research community are actively supported by offering the CDS's expertise and facilities. An example of how bottom-up initiatives can blossom with the help of library structures such as the CDS is ReproHack. ReproHack -- a reproducibility hackathon -- is a grass-root initiative by young scholars with the goal of improving research reproducibility in three ways. First, hackathon attendees learn about reproducibility tools and challenges by reproducing published results and providing feedback to authors on their attempt. Second, authors can nominate their work and receive feedback on their reproducibility efforts. Third, the collaborative atmosphere helps building a community interested in making their own research reproducible. A first ReproHack in the Netherlands took place on November 30th, 2019, co-organised by the CDS at the LU Library with 44 participants from the fields of psychology, engineering, biomedicine, and computer science. For 19 papers, 24 feedback forms were returned and five papers were reported as successfully reproduced. Besides the researchers' learning experience, the event led to recommendations on how to enhance research reproducibility. The ReproHack format therefore provides an opportunity for libraries to improve scientific reproducibility through community engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Community engagement is seen as key to citizen‐centred and sustainable healthcare systems as involving citizens in the designing, implementation and improvement of services and policies is thought to tailor these more closely to communities' own needs and experiences. Organizations have struggled to reach out to and involve disadvantaged citizens. This paper examines how if, why, and when low‐income citizens wish to be involved. Methods: For this qualitative realist case‐study, 19 interviews (one dyad) were held with (20) low‐income citizens in two Dutch municipalities. Additionally, the results were discussed with a reference panel consisting of professionals and citizens to enrich the results and to ensure the results had face validity. Results: The results showed four different ways in which low‐income citizens wished to be involved: (a) in a practical/volunteer way; (b) as a buddy; (c) as a lay expert; (d) not involved at all. The factors affecting citizens' interest and capacity to participate include citizens' own experiences of the services they access and their personal situations, e.g. their mental or physical health, extent of financial crisis, family situation, home environment. None of the interviewees was currently involved, but all had ideas for improving health(care) services and policies. Citizens' experiences of the services they accessed acted as a motivator for some to be involved as they wanted to ensure others would not have the same struggles, while for others their own needs and an apathetic system remained too high a barrier. To enable involvement, citizens need continued support for their own health(care) and financial situation, better communication and accessibility from services, practical support (e.g., training and bus passes) and recognition for their input (e.g., monetary compensation). Conclusion: The study shows that citizens' experiences of the services they accessed influenced if and how they wanted to be involved with health and care services. Despite the fact that all participants had shared solid ideas for improving services and policies, they were hindered by a bureaucratic, impersonal and inaccessible system. Organizations seem to underestimate the required investments to reach out to low‐income citizens and the support required to ensure their involvement. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in Study: Citizens as well as PPI organizations were members of the reference panel who helped formulate the research questions and recruitment strategy. The local reference panel also helped to interpret and refine the initial findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current COVID-19 pandemic confines people to their homes, disrupting the fragile social fabric of deprived neighbourhoods and citizen's participation options. In deprived neighbourhoods, community engagement is central in building community resilience, an important resource for health and a prerequisite for effective health promotion programmes. It provides access to vulnerable groups and helps understand experiences, assets, needs and problems of citizens. Most importantly, community activities, including social support, primary care or improving urban space, enhance health through empowerment, strengthened social networks, mutual respect and providing a sense of purpose and meaning. In the context of inequalities associated with COVID-19, these aspects are crucial for citizens of deprived neighbourhoods who often feel their needs and priorities are ignored. In this perspectives paper, illustrated by a varied overview of community actions in the UK and The Netherlands, we demonstrate how citizens, communities and organizations may build resilience and community power. Based on in-depth discussion among the authors we distilled six features of community actions: increase in mutual aid and neighbourhood ties, the central role of community-based organizations (CBOs), changing patterns of volunteering, use of digital media and health promotion opportunities. We argue that in order to enable and sustain resilient and confident, 'disaster-proof', communities, areas which merit investment include supporting active citizens, new (digital) ways of community engagement, transforming formal organizations, alignment with the (local) context and applying knowledge in the field of health promotion in new ways, focussing on learning and co-creation with citizen initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores issues with archival preservation and access in the case of the audiovisual heritage of migrant communities, which defies hegemonic categories of nation, race, ethnicity, language. As such, although these communities are somewhat present in archives, they are marginalised and remain absent, silent, and dormant. Through two case studies of audiovisual representations of Turkish migrants from Dutch public archives, the article tackles possible ways to unravel such hegemonic categories, thereby reflecting the multiplicities and instabilities of migrant archival objects. It explores the pivotal role of community engagement for more inclusive archival practices that undermine its constitutive limits -- to work with archives against the archives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper describes a participatory methodology that supports investigation of the synergistic collaboration between communities affected by infectious disease outbreak events and relevant official institutions. The core principle underlying the methodology is the recognition that synergistic relationships, characterised by mutual trust and respect, between affected communities and official institutions provide the most effective means of addressing outbreak situations.Methods: The methodological approach and lessons learned were derived from four qualitative case studies including (i) two tick-borne disease events (Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever in Spain, 2016, and tick-borne encephalitis in the Netherlands, 2016); and (ii) two outbreaks of acute gastroenteritis (norovirus in Iceland, 2017, and verocytotoxin-producing Escherichia coli [VTEC] in Ireland, 2018). An after-event qualitative case study approach was taken using mixed methods. The studies were conducted in collaboration with the respective national public health authorities in the affected countries by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). The analysis focused on the specific actions undertaken by the participating countries' public health and other authorities in relation to community engagement, as well as the view from the perspective of affected communities.Results: Lessons highlight the critical importance of collaborating with ECDC National Focal Points during preparation and planning and with anthropological experts. Field work for each case study was conducted over one working week, which although limiting the number of individuals and institutions involved, still allowed for rich data collection due to the close collaboration with local authorities. The methodology enabled efficient extraction of synergies between authorities and communities. Implementing the methodology required a reflexivity among fieldworkers that ackowledges that different versions of reality can co-exist in the social domain. The method allowed for potential generalisability across studies. Issues of extra attention included insider-outsider perspectives, politically sensitivity of findings, and how to deal with ethical and language issues.Conclusions: The overall objective of the assessment is to identify synergies between institutional decision-making bodies and community actors and networks before, during and after an outbreak response to a given public health emergency. The methodology is generic and could be applied to a range of public health emergencies, zoonotic or otherwise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Very little attention has been given to the social accountability of conferences, either in action or in scholarship, in particular, of scientific conferences. Concerns that have been raised include: (1) Local communities and regions suffer from ecological pressure caused by conferences, (2) There is limited value to the local community, (3) International conferences take place at locations irrelevant to the topics discussed; hence there is no connection with locals, and (4) It has been the observation of the authors that <10% of participants may come from the region where the conference is organized, which makes it challenging to make a "positive societal impact" locally. We conducted a natural experiment investigating the interactions between academia, conference organizers, and community leaders. Methods: We utilized a case study approach to report on the outcomes of two 2022 annual international conferences that seek to improve community health. We used a mixed-methods approach of surveys and interviews. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify the key themes. Results: We obtained 358 responses from all six World Health Organization regions. Results from both conferences were split into two categories: the why and the how. A strong consensus among participants is that bi-directional learning between conference organizers and local communities leads to shared understanding and mutual goals. The data emphasize that including communities in academic conferences helps us progress forward from intentions toward demonstrating accountability and reporting impact. Discussion: A diversity of perspectives is needed to advance socially accountable health system transformation. Five best practices from conference participants are laid out as a framework to assist in the change: (1) Build trust, (2) provide funding for community member participation, (3) appreciation of local community knowledge, (4) involve the local community in the planning stages, and (5) make the local community part of the conference and learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inclusion and exclusion processes in community engagement do not take place in a vacuum, but are embedded in social, political and institutional contexts. To better capture the interplay between the individual agency of community participants and organizational structures in health research, we use a Bourdieusian framework. The notions of capital, habitus and field allow us to analyse how inclusion and exclusion of older persons in a Dutch healthcare research- and improvement programme are processually shaped overtime. The findings demonstrate that due to the influence of the medical and policy field, older persons with social, cultural and symbolic capital were included in target group panels. Frail older persons lacking these types of capital were often excluded. Despite the high amount of capital, the formally ‘included’ participants still experienced difficulties in engaging effectively in a medical research setting. We distinguish various strategies that older persons developed during the course of the programme to deal with this problem: (1) professionalization, (2) responsibilization, (3) pluralization, (4) opting out. Using these strategies older participants were able to incrementally change the medical field by shifting the focus to quality of life and welfare. We conclude that it is by definition impossible to ‘exclude exclusion’ at the start of care improvement programmes. It is only in the many pragmatic and mundane choices of ‘doing participation’ that more inclusive engagement can be realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)