An Antiracism Community-Based Participatory Research With Organizations Serving Immigrant and Marginalized Communities, Including Asian Americans and Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders in the United States Pacific Northwest: Qualitative Description Study With Key Informants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asian American (AA) community leaders, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NH/PI) community leaders, and allies in the United States Pacific Northwest expressed concern that there are families and children from AA communities and NH/PI communities who experience and witness acts of xenophobia and racism. This can cause racial trauma. The long-time practice of aggregating AA and NH/PI data contributes to erasure and makes it challenging to advance health equity, such as allocating resources. According to AAPI Data's long-awaited report in June 2022, there are over 24 million AAs and 1.6 million NHs/PIs in the United States, growing by 40% and 30%, respectively, between 2010 and 2020. Philanthropic investments have not kept up with this substantive increase. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine emphasized the need for effective partnerships to advance the health and well-being of individuals and communities in antiracism and system-level research. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this community-based participatory research qualitative description study was to identify perceptions and experiences regarding racial discrimination, race-based stress, and racial trauma; intergenerational healing and resiliency; and sharing the body with science from key informants of an academic and community partnership to inform antiracism coalition work. This partnership includes academic researchers and community leaders from community-based organizations and a health care organization serving immigrant and marginalized communities, including AAs and NHs/PIs in the United States Pacific Northwest. METHODS: In total, 10 key informants joined 1 of 2 participatory group discussions via videoconference for 2 hours in 2022. We used a semistructured and open-ended group interview guide. A qualitative participatory group-level assessment was conducted with the key informants and transcribed. Interpretations and meanings of the main points and the main themes were reflected upon, clarified, and verified with the key informants in real time. The field note-based data transcripts were manually coded using conventional content analysis. Reflexivity was used. RESULTS: There were 6 main themes: prejudice plus power in racism definition and working in solidarity to counter lateral oppression/false sense of security, microaggression as multilayers, "not assimilationist by nature" and responding differently to white superiority, intergenerational- and identity-related trauma, what is healing among People of Color and through a lens of resiliency and intergenerational connection and knowledge, and mistrust and fear in the research and health care systems surrounding intentions of the body. CONCLUSIONS: The themes highlight the importance of internal and intergenerational healing from racial trauma and the need for solidarity among communities of color to combat white supremacy and colonization. This work was foundational in an ongoing effort to dismantle racism and uplift the community voice through a cross-sector academic and community partnership to inform antiracism coalition work.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".