Search

This study examines how Mexican-origin women construct and navigate racialized identities in a postindustrial northern border community during a period of prolonged restrictive immigration and immigrant policies, and it considers mechanisms by which responses to racialization may shape health. This grounded theory analysis involves interviews with 48 Mexican-origin women in Detroit, Michigan, who identified as being in the first, 1.5, or second immigrant generation. In response to institutions and institutional agents using racializing markers to assess their legal status and policing access to health-promoting resources, women engaged in a range of strategies to resist being constructed as an "other." Women used the same racializing markers or symbols of (il)legality that had been used against them as a malleable set of resources to resist processes of racialization and to form, preserve, and affirm their identities. These responses include constructing an authorized immigrant identity, engaging in immigration advocacy, and resisting stigmatizing labels. These strategies may have different implications for health over time. Findings indicate the importance of addressing policies that promulgate or exacerbate racialization of Mexican-origin communities and other communities who experience growth through migration. Such policies include creating pathways to legalization and access to resources that have been invoked in racialization processes, such as state-issued driver's licenses.

Understanding what contributes to success of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships is essential to ensuring their effectiveness in addressing health disparities and health inequities. Synergy, the concept of accomplishing more together than separately, is central to partnership effectiveness. However, synergy specific to long-standing, equity-focused CBPR partnerships has not been closely examined. To address this, we defined and developed measures of partnership synergy as one dimension of a participatory mixed methods study, Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS), to develop a validated instrument to measure success in long-standing CBPR partnerships. Framed by a conceptual model and scoping literature review, we conducted in-depth interviews with a national panel of academic and community experts in CBPR and equity to develop partnership synergy measures. Items were refined through an iterative process, including a three-stage Delphi process, comparison with existing measures, cognitive interviews, and pilot testing. Seven questionnaire items were developed to measure synergy arising from equitable partnerships bringing together diverse partners across power differences to promote equity. Defining and measuring synergy in the context of long-standing partnership success is central to understanding the role of synergy in collaborative approaches to research and action and can strengthen CBPR partnerships to promote healthy communities and advance health equity.

Objectives: The 21st century has seen a rise in racism and xenophobia in the United States. Few studies have examined the health implications of heightened institutional and interpersonal racism. This study examines changes in reported discrimination and associations with blood pressure over time among non-Latino Blacks (NLBs), Latinos, and non-Latino Whites (NLWs) in an urban area, and variations by nativity among Latinos.Design: Data from a probability sample of NLB, Latino, and NLW Detroit, Michigan residents were collected in 2002-2003, with follow-up at the same addresses in 2007-2008. Surveys were completed at 80% of eligible housing units in 2008 (n = 460). Of those, 219 participants were interviewed at both time points and were thus included in this analysis. Discrimination patterns across racial/ethnic groups and associations with blood pressure were examined using generalized estimating equations.Results: From 2002 to 2008, NLBs and Latinos reported heightened interpersonal and institutional discrimination, respectively, compared with NLWs. There were no differences in associations between interpersonal discrimination and blood pressure. Increased institutional discrimination was associated with stronger increases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure for NLBs than NLWs, with no differences between Latinos and NLWs. Latino immigrants experienced greater increases in blood pressure with increased interpersonal and institutional discrimination compared to US-born Latinos.Conclusions: Together, these findings suggest that NLBs and Latinos experienced heightened discrimination from 2002 to 2008, and that increases in institutional discrimination were more strongly associated with blood pressure elevation among NLBs and Latino immigrants compared to NLWs and US-born Latinos, respectively. These findings suggest recent increases in discrimination experienced by NLBs and Latinos, and that these increases may exacerbate racial/ethnic health inequities.

Prior research has established associations between neighbourhood poverty and cumulative biological risk (CBR). CBR is conceptualized as indicative of the effects of stress on biological functioning, and is linked with increased morbidity and mortality. Studies suggest that supportive social relationships may be health protective, and may erode under conditions of poverty. This study examines whether social relationships are inversely associated with CBR and whether associations between neighbourhood poverty and CBR are mediated through social relationships. Data were from a stratified probability sample community survey (n=919) of residents of Detroit, Michigan, USA (2002-2003) and from the 2000 US Census. The outcome variable, CBR, included anthropometric and clinical measures. Independent variables included four indicators of social relationships: social support, neighbourhood satisfaction, social cohesion and neighbourhood participation. Multilevel models were used to test both research questions, with neighbourhood poverty and social relationships included at the block group level, and social relationships also included at the individual level, to disentangle individual from neighbourhood effects. Findings suggest some associations between social relationships and CBR after accounting for neighbourhood poverty and individual characteristics. In models that accounted for all indicators of social relationships, individual-level social support was associated with greater CBR (β=0.12, p=0.04), while neighbourhood-level social support was marginally significantly protective of CBR (within-neighbourhood: β=-0.36, p=0.06; between-neighbourhood: β=-0.24, p=0.06). In contrast, individual-level neighbourhood satisfaction was protective of CBR (β=-0.10, p=0.02), with no within-neighbourhood (β=0.06, p=0.54) or between-neighbourhood association (β=-0.04, p=0.38). Results indicate no significant association between either social cohesion or neighbourhood participation and CBR. Associations between neighbourhood poverty and CBR were not mediated by social relationships. These findings suggest that neighbourhood-level social support and individual-level neighbourhood satisfaction may be health protective and that neighbourhood poverty, social support and neighbourhood satisfaction are associated with CBR through independent pathways.

Partnerships that effectively engage in certain key structural and process functions are more likely to meet their research goals and contribute to longer-term health equity outcomes. Ongoing evaluation of partnerships' level of achievement of these key functions, along with their fidelity to the guiding principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR), is therefore essential to understand how they can achieve desired partnership outcomes. This article describes the validated Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) Questionnaire and the use of an accompanying Facilitation Guide in helping members of CBPR partnerships evaluate their partnership's state of development and interpret findings to improve its structure, processes, and outcomes. We describe the conceptual framework guiding the development of the MAPS Questionnaire and its 81-item across seven key outcome dimensions, along with 28 items measuring precursor characteristics of CBPR partnership outcomes. The Facilitation Guide provides general guidelines for sharing, interpreting, and applying results within partnerships using a participatory process, definitions and items for each dimension, an example of presenting summary means, and dimension-specific reflective questions for discussion. We offer recommendations for practical uses of the MAPS Questionnaire and Facilitation Guide. Whether used as a comprehensive tool or by dimension, the MAPS Questionnaire is conceptually sound and empirically validated for evaluating how CBPR partnerships can achieve long-standing success. CBPR partnerships at any stage of development will find the MAPS Questionnaire and Facilitation Guide useful in measuring and interpreting indicators of partnership success, sharing results, and improving their ability to contribute to achieving health equity goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is increasingly used by community and academic partners to examine health inequities and promote health equity in communities. Despite increasing numbers of CBPR partnerships, there is a lack of consensus in the field regarding what defines partnership success and how to measure factors contributing to success in long-standing CBPR partnerships. Aims: To identify indicators and measures of success in long-standing CBPR partnerships as part of a larger study whose aim is to develop and validate an instrument measuring success across CBPR partnerships. Methods: The Joanna Briggs Institute framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guided searches of three databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus) for articles published between 2007 and 2017 and evaluating success in CBPR partnerships existing longer than 4 years. Results: Twenty-six articles met search criteria. We identified 3 key domains and 7 subdomains with 28 underlying indicators of success. Six partnerships developed or used instruments to measure their success; only one included reliability or validity data. Discussion: CBPR partnerships reported numerous intersecting partner, partnership, and outcome indicators important for success. These results, along with data from key informant interviews with community and academic partners and advisement from a national panel of CBPR experts, will inform development of items for an instrument measuring CBPR partnership success. Conclusion: The development of a validated instrument measuring indicators of success will allow long-standing CBPR partnerships to evaluate their work toward achieving health equity and provide a tool for newly forming CBPR partnerships aiming to achieve long-term success.

In this Perspective, we build on social justice and emancipatory traditions within the field of health education, and the field's long-standing commitment to building knowledge and shared power to promote health equity, to examine lessons and opportunities for health education emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic. Examining patterns that emerged as the pandemic unfolded in Metropolitan Detroit, with disproportionate impacts on African American and low-income communities, we consider conditions that contributed to excess exposure, mortality, and reduced access to critical health protective resources. Using a life course framework, we consider enduring impacts of the pandemic for health equity. Finally, we suggest several strategic actions in three focal areas--environment, occupation, and housing--that can be taken by health educators working in partnership with community members, researchers, and decision makers, using, for example, a community-based participatory research approach, to reduce adverse impacts of COVID-19 and promote long-term equity in health.

We examine racialization processes experienced by women of Mexican origin in a northern border community during a protracted period of restrictive immigrant policies that have disparately affected Mexican-origin communities, and consider pathways through which these experiences may affect health. This grounded theory analysis draws on interviews conducted in 2013–2014 with 48 first, 1.5, and second generation Mexican-origin women living in Detroit, MI. Racialization processes blurred boundaries between Latinas/os, immigrants, and undocumented immigrants. Racialized policies and interactions required women to negotiate shifting and often precarious social and political terrain. We describe racializing markers used by agents of multiple institutions to assess the legal status of women and members of their social networks, shaping their access to the resources over which institutional agents held power. Specifically, we consider the dynamic mechanisms by which multiple legal, social, and employment institutions exacted immigrant policing and bureaucratic surveillance. These include: (1) interior and border immigration enforcement agents’ active surveillance of residents; (2) local law enforcement officials’ assertion of authority over driver’s licenses and contact with immigration officials, often in traffic-related encounters; (3) Secretary of State clerks’ discretion in assessing legal status and issuing driver’s licenses and state IDs; (4) social welfare agents’ scrutiny of citizenship status in determining access to nutritional, economic, and medical resources; and (5) employers’ exploitation of these structural vulnerabilities to justify unfair treatment of immigrant workers. We theorize several mechanisms, by which these processes affect health, including: stigmatization; hypervigilance; and restricted access to health-promoting resources.

ObjectivesA key challenge in evaluating the impact of community-based participatory research (CBPR) is identifying what mechanisms and pathways are critical for health equity outcomes. Our purpose is to provide an empirical test of the CBPR conceptual model to address this challenge.MethodsA three-stage quantitative survey was completed: (1) 294 US CBPR projects with US federal funding were identified; (2) 200 principal investigators completed a questionnaire about project-level details; and (3) 450 community or academic partners and principal investigators completed a questionnaire about perceived contextual, process, and outcome variables. Seven in-depth qualitative case studies were conducted to explore elements of the model not captured in the survey; one is presented due to space limitations.ResultsWe demonstrated support for multiple mechanisms illustrated by the conceptual model using a latent structural equation model. Significant pathways were identified, showing the positive association of context with partnership structures and dynamics. Partnership structures and dynamics showed similar associations with partnership synergy and community involvement in research; both of these had positive associations with intermediate community changes and distal health outcomes. The case study complemented and extended understandings of the mechanisms of how partnerships can improve community conditions.ConclusionsThe CBPR conceptual model is well suited to explain key relational and structural pathways for impact on health equity outcomes.

Background: The U.S. uninsured rate has dropped significantly since the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), yet insurance coverage remains lower in historically marginalized communities than in the overall population. New consumer engagement approaches that involve these populations are needed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Insuring Good Health Intervention, a website and video series designed to improve engagement with health insurance and ACA reforms. The study was designed and implemented using a community-based participatory research approach. Method: We conducted a lagged-control cluster randomized controlled trial to evaluate Insuring Good Health with racially and ethnically diverse adults seeking services in medically underserved areas within the Detroit, Michigan metropolitan area. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 9 months postintervention, and including self-efficacy, knowledge, beliefs, and intention to seek help with insurance navigation and care. Results: Among 243 participants, mean age was 43.4 (SD = 13) years, and all participants met federal guidelines for poverty. The study had an 86% response rate at 9-month follow-up (n = 209). Compared with the lagged-control group, intervention participants had more positive beliefs concerning preventive care (estimate 0.51, standard error 0.16; p < .01), and intention to seek help with insurance navigation and care (estimate 0.43, standard error 0.17; p < .001) at 9-month follow-up. Hispanic participants benefitted the most from the intervention, including improved knowledge of health insurance eligibility over 9 months compared with other racial/ethnic groups (estimate -0.97, standard error 0.40, p < .01). Discussion: Insuring Good Health was associated with increased intention to seek help with insurance navigation and care, and improved beliefs around preventive care. Conclusions: Insuring Good Health has the potential to be an important consumer engagement tool to reduce disparities in health insurance coverage and care seeking.

This article describes a mixed methods study of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership practices and the links between these practices and changes in health status and disparities outcomes. Directed by a CBPR conceptual model and grounded in indigenous-transformative theory, our nation-wide, cross-site study showcases the value of a mixed methods approach for better understanding the complexity of CBPR partnerships across diverse community and research contexts. The article then provides examples of how an iterative, integrated approach to our mixed methods analysis yielded enriched understandings of two key constructs of the model: trust and governance. Implications and lessons learned while using mixed methods to study CBPR are provided.

Conceptualizing and testing factors that contribute to the success of community–academic partnerships are critical to understanding their contributions to the health and well-being of communities. Most measures to date focus on factors that contribute to the development of new partnerships, and only a few have been adequately tested and validated. Methods. The Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) study followed a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach and a multiphase process that included the construction and pilot testing of a questionnaire, and a national survey to validate the psychometric properties of the questionnaire in long-standing CBPR partnerships (existing ≥ six years). All members within partnerships were recruited to complete the survey (55 partnerships with 563 partners). We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach's alpha statistics, and a pairwise correlations approach to assess discriminant and convergent validity, and assessed internal consistency, and test–retest reliability. Results. All MAPS Questionnaire dimensions demonstrated strong validity and reliability and demonstrated agreement over time. Conclusion. The MAPS Questionnaire includes seven dimensions and 81 items related to the MAPS conceptual model and provides a scientific, in-depth measurement tool that allows long-standing CBPR partnerships to evaluate their work toward achieving health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As part of a 5-year study to develop and validate an instrument for measuring success in long-standing community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships, we utilized the Delphi method with a panel of 16 community and academic CBPR experts to assess face and content validity of the instrument's broad concepts of success and measurement items. In addition to incorporating quantitative and qualitative feedback from two online surveys, we included a 2-day face-to-face meeting with the Expert Panel to invite open discussion and diversity of opinion in line with the CBPR principles framing and guiding the study. The face-to-face meeting allowed experts to review the survey data (with maintained anonymity), convey their perspectives, and offer interpretations that were untapped in the online surveys. Using a CBPR approach facilitated a synergistic process that moved above and beyond the consensus achieved in the initial Delphi rounds, to enhance the Delphi technique and the development of items in the instrument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]