Community engagement has been named a research priority by the National Institutes of Health, and scholars are calling for community engagement as an approach to address racism and equity in science. Robust community-engaged research can improve research quality, increase inclusion of traditionally marginalized populations, broaden the impact of findings on real-life situations, and is particularly valuable for underexplored research topics. The goal of this paper is to describe lessons learned and best practices that emerged from community engagement in a multi-institution population health research consortium. We describe how a foundation was laid to enable community-engaged research activities in the consortium, using a staged and stepped process to build and embed multi-level community-engaged research approaches. We staged our development to facilitate (a) awareness of community engagement among consortium members, (b) the building of solidarity and alliances, and (c) the initiation of long-term engagement to allow for meaningful research translation. Our stepped process involved strategic planning; building momentum; institutionalizing engagement into the consortium infrastructure; and developing, implementing, and evaluating a plan. We moved from informal, one-time community interactions to systematic, formalized, capacity-building reciprocal engagement. We share our speed bumps and troubleshooting that inform our recommendations for other large research consortia—including investing the time it takes to build up community engagement capacity, acknowledging and drawing on strengths of the communities of interest, assuring a strong infrastructure of accountability for community engagement, and grounding the work in anti-racist principles.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, aromantic, and other sexual and/or gender minority (LGBTQIA+) communities are underrepresented in health research and subject to documented health disparities. In addition, LGBTQIA+ communities have experienced mistreatment, discrimination, and stigma in health care and health research settings. Effectively engaging LGBTQIA+ communities and individuals in health research is critical to developing representative data sets, improving health care provision and policy, and reducing disparities. However, little is known about what engagement approaches work well with LGBTQIA+ people. This paper describes the development of PRIDEnet (pridenet.org), a national network dedicated to catalyzing LGBTQIA+ community involvement in health research and built upon well-established community-engaged research (CEnR) principles. PRIDEnet’s relationship building and digital communications activities engage thousands of LGBTQIA+-identified people across the country and offer multiple low-threshold ways to participate in specific studies and shape research. These activities comprise a CEnR infrastructure that engages LGBTQIA+ people on behalf of other projects, primarily The PRIDE Study (pridestudy.org) and the National Institutes of Health’s All of Us Research Program (joinallofus.org/lgbtqia). Our impact, results, and lessons learned apply to those engaging communities underserved in biomedical research and include: the importance of building adaptable infrastructure that sustains transformational relationships long-term; implementing high-touch activities to establish trust and broad-reach activities to build large data sets; nurturing a team of diverse professionals with lived experiences that reflect those of the communities to be engaged; and maintaining CEnR mechanisms that exceed advice-giving and result in substantive research contributions from beginning to end.

This project sought to evaluate a citizen science project in the classroom via two foci: 1) whether the project could benefit students by increasing their science engagement, and 2) whether students could generate high-quality data. A total of 116 students in two honors biology and four environmental studies classes at a rural high school in the Chesapeake Bay watershed gathered water-quality data from a local stream. Water-quality data gathered from the same area by professionals were obtained from the local water treatment company via email. The quality of the student data was determined by comparing student data to professional data, as well as by eliciting students’ understanding of data quality before and after the project via short-answer questions. Students’ emotional and behavioral engagement were measured and compared before and after the project using a Likert-type questionnaire, and their behavioral engagement was additionally quantified via observation. The results showed that student data gathered using high-quality instruments were similar to professional data, according to unpaired t-tests. Students’ self-reported engagement did not change, but the students’ observed behavioral engagement was significantly higher post-intervention. The similarity between student and professional data and the increase in students’ behavioral-science engagement show that citizen science has the potential to benefit both students and scientists at the same time, by providing a high-quality dataset while increasing student engagement. This project has implications for formal and informal science education providers, and those interested in developing citizen science programs for youth and adults.

The world is a book and those who do not travel only read one page. – St. Augustine

This paper outlines an initiative to adapt the Community Partnered Research Ethics Training (CPRET) for the cultural context of the CHURCH (Congregation as Healers Uniting to Restore Community Health) project. The CHURCH project is a community-partnered participatory research project that seeks to promote the mental well-being of African American populations by developing, implementing, and evaluating a mental health training curriculum for faith leaders in Black churches. Participatory research, in which community stakeholders collaborate with researchers as equal partners to address problems impacting marginalized communities, has recently become more popular in academia. Training is necessary to equip community partners with the skills and knowledge required for full research participation. Community partners frequently encounter ethical issues in participatory research, but limited training resources are available to proactively prevent and address such issues. The CPRET was developed through a collaboration between the Clinical and Translational Science Institute and the Human Research Protection Office and Community Research Advisory Board at the University of Pittsburgh. It surveys research processes and core research ethics principles, and it stimulates discussion regarding best practices by engaging participants in scenario-based exercises in which they identify ethical and unethical research. By describing how we utilized the CPRET in the CHURCH project and presenting a summary of participant feedback, we aim to build resources for community-engaged scholars seeking to engage community members in ethical research.

Community engagement in research enhances a community's ability to address its own needs and challenges while ensuring that researchers understand community priorities. Some confusion exists about the definition of community engagement in the context of veteran research. The purpose of this study was to search the literature to identify common applications of community engagement in U.S. veterans’ research and to determine how and at what stage veterans were involved in the research process. A systematic scoping review was conducted using CINAHL Plus, Wiley Cochrane Library, Education Source, ERIC, APA PsycInfo, National Library of Medicine PubMed, ProQuest Social Services Abstracts, and SocIndex by two independent investigators. Forty-two of 1,977 studies from initial searches were included in this review. From these studies, we identified two aspects of veterans’ involvement in research characterized as “community engagement”: (a) veterans as participants and (b) veterans as partners in the research process. There is a need to encourage veterans’ engagement and to standardize reporting of their engagement in the various phases of the research process.

In this critical reflection, I discuss my dual roles as a president of a local nonprofit organization and a full professor at my university. I reflect on how I moved from a volunteer at an animal shelter to a community leader, discuss the organization I founded in 2019, and explore the various, daily intersections between these two roles and experiences.

This article focuses on the innovative teaching practices using big data that arose from a 4-year collaboration between faculty, first-generation students at California State University, Los Angeles (CSULA), and local communities. The aim of the National Science Foundation–funded Big Data Project at CSULA was to engage students and faculty in using big data to tackle social issues such as racial violence, poverty, environmental inequalities, urban ecology, and structural barriers in Los Angeles, while preserving the cultural richness of the communities in East Los Angeles and surrounding areas. Once a year, faculty members applied to the program to incorporate data projects into their courses, received training, adapted their curricula, and worked with nonprofits. Our experience showed that the students who participated in this semester-long, hands-on learning experience exceeded the learning objectives of the program and specific courses. They were key contributors in generating new insights using big data, fostering meaningful dialogue, and creating research and scholarship opportunities that positively impacted their communities.