DESIGN AND EVALUATION OF A COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD AS PART OF A COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH PROJECT TO DEVELOP HEALTHY ACTIVE LIVING INTERVENTIONS FOR NEWCOMER FAMILIES IN HAMILTON, ONTARIODESIGN AND EVALUATION OF A COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD AS PART OF A COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH PROJECT TO DEVELOP HEALTHY ACTIVE LIVING INTERVENTIONS FOR NEWCOMER FAMILIES IN HAMILTON, ONTARIO
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Newcomer populations to Canada face unique barriers to healthcare, including cultural, linguistic, and systemic challenges, necessitating the development of tailored, culturally sensitive interventions. This dissertation focuses on the role a Community Advisory Board (CAB) plays in a community-based participatory research (CBPR) project that addresses the risk of type 2 diabetes, obesity, and chronic health conditions amongst newcomer families and children. The dissertation begins by introducing the context and urgency of obesity and type 2 diabetes as pressing public health issues amongst newcomers. This section highlights the intersection of the social determinants of health, cultural factors, and systemic barriers that contribute to these conditions. The second section delves into CBPR methodology, exploring its suitability for addressing complex public health challenges and its application in CAB development. This chapter provides a theoretical and practical foundation for integrating community voices into all stages of intervention design, from conception to evaluation. The third section presents a scoping review that synthesizes existing literature on nature based healthy active living intervention development and the use of tools or methods to inform collaborative work in this space. This review identifies best practices, gaps in knowledge, and insights for collaborative intervention development, laying the groundwork for this study's unique contribution. The fourth section describes the CAB design process in detail, showcasing the steps taken to ensure inclusivity, cultural relevance, and meaningful engagement of newcomer community members and community partners. Next the discussion on how we adopted a multiple methods approach to evaluate the CAB's functioning, including surveys and qualitative interviews to capture the perspectives and experiences of CAB members. This section highlights how the CAB fosters co-creation, and shared decision-making among diverse stakeholders. The dissertation concludes with a discussion of the challenges encountered, such as navigating power dynamics, addressing logistical constraints, and managing differing expectations among CAB members. It also reflects on the lessons learned and implications for future research and practice, offering practical recommendations for leveraging CABs in CBPR projects aimed at improving the health and well-being of marginalized communities. Finally, an epilogue ties together the findings, emphasizing the potential of CABs in CBPR to empower communities, reduce health disparities, and drive systemic change. This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on participatory research methodologies and provides a roadmap for future efforts to design and evaluate interventions that are truly community-centered.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,057 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».