To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Community of collaborative research.
Journal articles on the topic 'Community of collaborative research'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Community of collaborative research.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Woods, Sandi Schlup, Lynette Bunde Jensen, Paula Schulz, et al. "Collaborative Research: A Community Approach." Clinical Nurse Specialist 14, no. 1 (2000): 13–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00002800-200001000-00008.
Full text
2
Pinto, Rogério M. "Community Perspectives on Factors That Influence Collaboration in Public Health Research." Health Education & Behavior 36, no. 5 (2009): 930–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090198108328328.
Full textAbstract:
Community collaboration in research may lead to better methods, results, and dissemination of interventions. Little systematic research has examined specific factors that influence community-based organizations (CBOs) to collaborate in public health research. There is an urgent need to advance knowledge on this topic so that together, researchers and CBOs can minimize barriers to collaboration. This study advances a CBOfocused characterization of collaboration in HIV-prevention research. By focusing on the perspectives of 20 key informants in 10 HIV-prevention CBOs, qualitative data revealed factors that influenced their collaborations in four domains: (a) Researchers’ Characteristics (expertise, availability), (b) Collaborative Research Characteristics (ought to improve services and CBO infrastructure); (c) Community Partner—Researcher Relationships (resolving social and professional issues); and (d) Barriers to HIV-Prevention Research Collaboration (cultural and social disconnect between CBO and academia). To reduce barriers, researchers ought to enhance motivators that facilitate collaboration. To use the advantages of community-based research, prevention scientists and policy makers ought to embrace CBOs’ characterization of what makes health research genuinely collaborative.
3
Myrick, Roger, Anthony Lemelle, Bart Aoki, Steve Truax, and George Lemp. "Best Practices for Community Collaborative Research." AIDS Education and Prevention 17, no. 4 (2005): 400–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/aeap.2005.17.4.400.
Full text
4
Stockwell-Smith, Gillian, Wendy Moyle, Ursula Kellett, and Henry Brodaty. "Community practitioner involvement in collaborative research." Dementia 14, no. 4 (2013): 450–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1471301213498760.
Full text
5
Lang, Catherine, Larry Stillman, Henry Linger, et al. "COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH PARTNERSHIPS IN THE COMMUNITY." Information, Communication & Society 15, no. 7 (2012): 1081–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2012.704061.
Full text
6
Wake, Anthony, Jill Davies, Celia Drake, Michael Rowbotham, Nicola Smith, and Rowena Rossiter. "Keep Safe: collaborative practice development and research with people with learning disabilities." Tizard Learning Disability Review 25, no. 4 (2020): 173–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/tldr-12-2019-0040.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This collaborative paper (working together) describes collaborative practice development and research by and with people from the learning disabilities community. This paper aims to show some of the activities which supported the collaborative practice development and research to show and encourage others to do more collaboration. The paper format is based on a previous collaborative paper published in the Tizard Learning Disability Review (Chapman et al., 2013). Design/methodology/approach The collaborative practice development and feasibility study [1] focuses on an intervention called Keep Safe. This is an intervention for young people with learning disabilities who are 12 years and older and have shown “out-of-control” or harmful sexual behaviour. Findings The paper gives examples of activities of the Keep Safe Advisory Group in planning, doing and thinking about Keep Safe development and feasibility. The authors list some good things and some difficulties in collaborating. They look at which parts of Frankena et al.’s (2019a) Consensus Statement on how to do inclusive research were done, which ones were not, and why. Social implications The paper ends with some thoughts about collaborating with people from the learning disabilities community: for people with learning disabilities, practitioners and researchers. Originality/value The paper is original in its illustration of collaborative practice development and research and measuring the activities against the inclusive research consensus statement.
7
Chak, Choiwai Maggie. "Literature Review on Relationship Building for Community-academic Collaboration in Health Research and Innovation." MATEC Web of Conferences 215 (2018): 02002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201821502002.
Full textAbstract:
In response to European Commission Horizon 2020’s call for ‘science-for-and-with-community’, scholars have recognized the need to conduct ‘responsible research and innovation’ and engage more with communities to combat today’s complex health challenges. Hence, higher priority has been placed to cooperate with communities in health research and innovation development to better match societal values, needs and expectations. Accordingly, the approach of community-based participatory research (CBPR), the ‘gold standard’ within the community-engaged research spectrum, is the most widely discussed. However, it is seldom achieved in reality, as it requires establishment and maintenance of open, transparent, trustful and ongoing relationships between community partners and academia to succeed. Paradoxically, despite of the significance of quality collaborative relationship to the quality and success of community-academic collaboration, the key elements to achieve it were seldom discussed.Herein, the literature review aimed to (1) discuss the previous experiences and challenges in building and sustaining community-academic collaborative relationships; (2) examine the relationship building strategies for quality collaborative relationships; and (3) identify the potential research gaps for future research.Focusing on the area of health research and innovation, peer-reviewed articles, books and grey literature related to building and sustaining relationships in community-academic collaboration published between 1998 and 2018 were identified using the Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar bibliographic databases and Google search engine. Literature available in full-texts and English language with a focus on relationship aspects of community-academic collaboration were examined. Previous literature suggested thatacademics and community members encountered common challenges in experiencing inequitable relationships, distrust, divide between academia and community, uncommon norms of power sharing, dissemination of results and lack of resources for maintaining long-term relationships. Two approaches of relationship building: (1) personal qualities and competence, and (2) actions for relationship building from the beginning to the end stages of collaborative relationship were discussed. Literature revealed that the ways that academics approach, collaborate, communicate with and maintain in the community had significant impact on both current and future collaborative relationships. In addition, academics differed in acceptance and readiness towards community engagement, which could be attributed to the differences in personal qualities and competence. Future research should target on identifying the factors contributing to such individual differences and compare its impact on the quality of relationship with community, so as to better cultivate individuals’ readiness and capacity towards community engagement and effective relationship building with community.
8
Isenberg, Petra, Niklas Elmqvist, Jean Scholtz, Daniel Cernea, Kwan-Liu Ma, and Hans Hagen. "Collaborative visualization: Definition, challenges, and research agenda." Information Visualization 10, no. 4 (2011): 310–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1473871611412817.
Full textAbstract:
The conflux of two growing areas of technology – collaboration and visualization – into a new research direction, collaborative visualization, provides new research challenges. Technology now allows us to easily connect and collaborate with one another – in settings as diverse as over networked computers, across mobile devices, or using shared displays such as interactive walls and tabletop surfaces. Digital information is now regularly accessed by multiple people in order to share information, to view it together, to analyze it, or to form decisions. Visualizations are used to deal more effectively with large amounts of information while interactive visualizations allow users to explore the underlying data. While researchers face many challenges in collaboration and in visualization, the emergence of collaborative visualization poses additional challenges, but it is also an exciting opportunity to reach new audiences and applications for visualization tools and techniques. The purpose of this article is (1) to provide a definition, clear scope, and overview of the evolving field of collaborative visualization, (2) to help pinpoint the unique focus of collaborative visualization with its specific aspects, challenges, and requirements within the intersection of general computer-supported cooperative work and visualization research, and (3) to draw attention to important future research questions to be addressed by the community. We conclude by discussing a research agenda for future work on collaborative visualization and urge for a new generation of visualization tools that are designed with collaboration in mind from their very inception.
9
Pelaez, Nancy, Trevor R. Anderson, Stephanie M. Gardner, et al. "A Community-Building Framework for Collaborative Research Coordination across the Education and Biology Research Disciplines." CBE—Life Sciences Education 17, no. 2 (2018): es2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-04-0060.
Full textAbstract:
Since 2009, the U.S. National Science Foundation Directorate for Biological Sciences has funded Research Coordination Networks (RCN) aimed at collaborative efforts to improve participation, learning, and assessment in undergraduate biology education (UBE). RCN-UBE projects focus on coordination and communication among scientists and educators who are fostering improved and innovative approaches to biology education. When faculty members collaborate with the overarching goal of advancing undergraduate biology education, there is a need to optimize collaboration between participants in order to deeply integrate the knowledge across disciplinary boundaries. In this essay we propose a novel guiding framework for bringing colleagues together to advance knowledge and its integration across disciplines, the “Five ‘C’s’ of Collaboration: Commitment, Collegiality, Communication, Consensus, and Continuity.” This guiding framework for professional network practice is informed by both relevant literature and empirical evidence from community-building experience within the RCN-UBE Advancing Competencies in Experimentation–Biology (ACE-Bio) Network. The framework is presented with practical examples to illustrate how it might be used to enhance collaboration between new and existing participants in the ACE-Bio Network as well as within other interdisciplinary networks.
10
Dimitrova, Dimitrina, and Emmanuel Koku. "Managing Collaborative Research Networks." International Journal of Virtual Communities and Social Networking 2, no. 4 (2010): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jvcsn.2010100101.
Full textAbstract:
This paper explores how management practices shape the way dispersed communities of practice (CoPs) function. The analysis is a case study of a dispersed community engaged in conducting and managing collaborative research. The analysis uses data from a social network survey and semi-structured interviews to capture the management practices in the community and demonstrate how they are linked to the patterns of information flows and communication.This analysis is a test case for the broader issue of how distributed communities function. It shows that even highly distributed CoPs may have a dual life: they exist both online and offline, in both face-to-face meetings and email exchanges of their participants. The study examines a dispersed community engaged in conducting and managing collaborative research. The analysis uses data from a social network survey and interviews to examine its managerial practices, information exchanges and communication practices.
11
Sanstad, Katherine Haynes, Ron Stall, Ellen Goldstein, Wendy Everett, and Ruth Brousseau. "Collaborative Community Research Consortium: A Model for HIV Prevention." Health Education & Behavior 26, no. 2 (1999): 171–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109019819902600202.
Full textAbstract:
In 1991, the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies (CAPS) at the University of California, San Francisco, set out to develop a model of community collaborative research that would bring the skills of science to the service of HIV prevention and the knowledge of service providers into the domain of research. Essential elements of the model were training for community-based organizations (CBOs) in research protocol writing, partnership between CBOs and CAPS researchers, program research funding, support to implement studies and analyze results, and a program manager to oversee the effort and foster the relationships between CBOs and researchers. In this article, the authors describe the CAPS model of consortium-based community collaborative research. They also introduce a set of papers, written by researchers and service providers, that describes collaborative research projects conducted by research institutions and CBOs and illustrates how collaboration can change both HIV prevention research and service.
12
Hasegawa, Kazuo, Gene D. Cohen, Manfred Bergener, and Sanford I. Finkel. "Expanding the Opportunities for Collaborative Research." International Psychogeriatrics 5, no. 2 (1993): 115–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1041610293001450.
Full textAbstract:
Although scientific research is generally and appropriately initiated by individuals, there are limitations and inefficiencies inherent in studies done by individuals alone. Collaboration is the concept of our time. As an example, both the medical community and lay public recognize the urgent need for an effective antidementia drug. Sound clinical trials will require subjects sufficiently numerous for investigation, and a multicentered collaborative study approach, extending even to international collaborative clinical trials.
13
Cooper, Katherine R., and Lynn O. Cooper. "Partners, Not Providers: A Collaboration Typology for Congregations and Community." Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 50, no. 5 (2021): 919–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0899764021991669.
Full textAbstract:
Scholars have long been interested in nonprofits, religious congregations, and their collaborative activity. This research builds upon past large-scale studies of congregations to suggest a nuanced understanding of how clergy approach congregational partnerships and make decisions about collaborating with community organizations. Using qualitative data from a geographically bounded sample of 30 Protestant congregations and grounded theory methodology, we suggest that clergy view their congregations as serving a different purpose from nonprofit partners and navigate numerous tensions inherent in congregational life in their pursuit of collaborative activity. We introduce a new typology of congregational collaboration that posits collaboration as a strategy for providing material and spiritual resources, in and outside of their congregations.
14
Brown, Mary Ellen, Tracey Rizzuto, and Pallavi Singh. "Strategic compatibility, collaboration and collective impact for community change." Leadership & Organization Development Journal 40, no. 4 (2019): 421–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/lodj-05-2018-0180.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Communities are best able to tackle complex social problems when solutions are achieved collaboratively. Inter-organizational partnerships are strongest and provide the greatest benefit to communities when the relationships are mutually compatible. The purpose of this paper is to introduce an evidence-informed approach to identifying and forming mutually compatible collaborations among organizations responsible for promoting community well-being and carrying out community-level interventions. Design/methodology/approach A three-stage case study examines the utility of a novel measurement tool for identifying opportunities for strategic collaboration. The strategic compatibility assessment (SCA) was designed to identify inter-organizational collaborative capacities within and across sectors as a means to motivate collaborative behaviors that are essential to community change initiatives that advance the collective impact. Findings The findings of this paper indicate the SCA is an effective tool for fostering mutually beneficial collaborative partnerships. A high degree of content, face and practical validity was evidenced in two independent studies of SCA, and organizations using the SCA tool reported a moderate-to-high degree of collaborative behavior in a post-intervention assessment of SCA outcomes. These findings provide field-based support for the SCA to promote cross-sector collaboration for community-level interventions. Originality/value The SCA tool describes the degree of collaboration among organizations that operate within a neighborhood; identifies potential points of mutual compatibility within the network; and creates pathways for leveraging collaborative behavior to promote community capitals. The aim of this research is to examine the potential of the SCA tool to shift the non-profit sector climate away from one characterized by competition toward one rich with collaboration.
15
Jessee, Nathan, Kourtney K. Collum, and Richard D. Schulterbrandt Gragg. "Community-based Participatory Research: Challenging “Lone Ethnographer” Anthropology in the Community and the Classroom." Practicing Anthropology 37, no. 4 (2015): 9–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.17730/0888-4552-37.4.9.
Full textAbstract:
Despite a rich history of collaborative and engaged scholarship and the recent “participatory turn” in anthropology few anthropology departments train students in the philosophy or methods of collaboration. Graduate training is typically characterized by conventional classroom-based lectures and individualized projects, while participatory research is thought of as something scholars can do later in their careers. The 2013 Health Equity Alliance of Tallahassee (HEAT) Ethnographic Field School disrupted this paradigm. The Field School used a community-based participatory research (CBPR) framework to train graduate students and community stakeholders in applied research methods through participation in an established community/university research partnership, examining race, racism, and health outcomes. The Field School was comprised of a racially, economically, and educationally diverse, intergenerational, multicultural, and multiethnic group of participants. Reflecting on this experience, we challenge the myth of the “lone ethnographer” and argue for a reorientation in anthropological methods training towards transdisciplinary, participatory, and collaborative ethnographic methods.
16
Jenkins, Davis. "Community College Research Center: Collaborative Research to Improve Student Success." Community College Journal of Research and Practice 39, no. 10 (2015): 933–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2015.1033780.
Full text
17
McNeill, Fergus, and Alison Urie. "Collaboration before collaborative research: The development of ‘Distant Voices’." Methodological Innovations 13, no. 2 (2020): 205979912093727. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2059799120937270.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, we explore the origins and early development of the ongoing collaborative action research project ‘Distant Voices – Coming Home’. We begin by explaining why and how our somewhat different backgrounds and interests came to be connected in Distant Voices. We then go on to explore the project’s first two development stages. In discussing the first phase (Distant Voices 1), we focus on how and why we developed creative processes and practices as modes of communication, knowledge exchange and public engagement. In discussing the second phase (Distant Voices 2), we reflect upon how and why these practices came to be seen as constitutive of sites of personal and community development and of knowledge generation. In conclusion, we reflect briefly on the challenges of formalising Distant Voices in its current form – as a large-scale, collaborative research project.
18
Guldan, Steven J., Alexander G. Fernald, Carlos G. Ochoa, and Vincent C. Tidwell. "Collaborative Community Hydrology Research in Northern New Mexico." Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education 152, no. 1 (2013): 49–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-704x.2013.03167.x.
Full text
19
Tampubolon, Edwin Rinaldo, and Amy Yayuk Sri Rahayu. "Penanganan Sampah Secara Kolaboratif antara Masyarakat dan Petugas Penanganan Prasarana dan Sarana Umum (PPSU) Tingkat Kelurahan (Kasus Penanganan Sampah di Kelurahan Jembatan Lima Kecamatan Tambora Kota Administrasi Jakarta Barat)." Jurnal Inspirasi 10, no. 1 (2019): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.35880/inspirasi.v10i1.57.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractWaste management is one form of public service from the government. On the other hand the community must also participate and collaborate with the government in the implementation, decision making, and supervision of waste handling. By using a descriptive qualitative approach, this study answers how collaborative governance processes in handling waste between community self-help and Public Facility Maintenance Officers (PPSU) and the factors that influence it. The results of the study show that collaborative waste management processes have been built with the involvement of government and non-government actors, there are a division of authority, collaboration between community self-help, community waste bank organization, public facility maintenance (PPSU) and the jakarta barat Environtment agency in collaboration with the private sector. Dialogue, trust, understanding, commitment have been established to achieve temporary result. Private involvement in collaborative governance processes is still limited to the stages of waste sorting activities. Research also found that this collaborative process was not perfect. factors that influence, among others are the low understanding of the community about sorting waste, the people's mindset that is still traditional in handling waste, lack of motivation from garbage officers, and less optimal infrastructure and management of garbage truck transportation. For this reason, socialization, more intensive counseling, assistance to change community behavior and innovation in stimulating active participation from the community are needed.Keywords :Collaborative Governance, Waste Management, waste sorting, waste collection, waste transportation, Facility Maintenance Officers (PPSU)
20
Lawrence, Dennis P. "The Community as Text: Using the Community for Collaborative Internet Research." English Journal 89, no. 1 (1999): 56. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/821357.
Full text
21
Prehoda, Emily, Richelle Winkler, and Chelsea Schelly. "Putting Research to Action: Integrating Collaborative Governance and Community-Engaged Research for Community Solar." Social Sciences 8, no. 1 (2019): 11. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/socsci8010011.
Full textAbstract:
Community solar involves the installation of a solar electricity system that is built in one central location with the costs and benefits distributed across voluntary investors who choose to subscribe and receive credits based on the generated energy. Community solar is gaining attention because of its potential to increase access to renewable energy and to democratize energy governance. This paper reflects on community-engaged research experiences in two rural community case studies in Michigan, USA, focusing on obstacles that were experienced during the research process rather than empirical findings from the research. We highlight difficulties we experienced to help advance a conceptual argument about incorporating collaborative governance strategies to improve community-engaged research for community energy projects. Our reflections illustrate challenges in community-engaged research that are associated with identifying who should be included in the decision-making process, sustaining participation and avoiding exploitation, establishing and communicating final decision-making power, and giving attention to outputs and outcomes of the research. We argue that collaborative governance strategies can help to address these challenges, as we experienced firsthand in our project.
22
Sullivan, Jennifer L., Dana Beth Weinburg, Stefanie Gidmark, Ryann L. Engle, Victoria A. Parker, and Denise A. Tyler. "Collaborative capacity and patient-centered care in the Veterans’ Health Administration Community Living Centers." International Journal of Care Coordination 22, no. 2 (2019): 90–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2053434519858028.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction Previous research in acute care settings has shown that collaborative capacity, defined as the way providers collaborate as equal team members, can be improved by the ways in which an organization supports its staff and teams. This observational cross-sectional study examines the association between collaborative capacity and supportive organizational context, supervisory support, and person-centered care in nursing homes to determine if similar relationships exist. Methods We adapted the Care Coordination Survey for nursing homes and administered it to clinical staff in 20 VA Community Living Centers. We used random effects models to examine the associations between supportive organizational context, supervisory support, and person-centered care with collaborative capacity outcomes including quality of staff interactions, task independence, and collaborative influence. Results A total of 723 Community Living Center clinical staff participated in the Care Coordination Survey resulting in a response rate of 29%. We found that teamwork and collaboration—measured as task interdependence, quality of interactions and collaborative influence—did not differ significantly between Community Living Centers but did differ significantly across occupational groups. Moreover, staff members’ experiences of teamwork and collaboration were positively associated with supportive organizational context and person-centered care. Discussion Our findings suggest that elements of organizational context are important to facilitating collaborative capacity. Additionally, investing in staffing, rewards, and person-centered care may improve teamwork.
23
Smith, Deborah B. "Research Collaboration with Community Organizations: A Case Example." Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services 84, no. 1 (2003): 75–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.84.
Full textAbstract:
This case example details a collaborative research experience between an urban state university and a community-based organization. The project combined the author's interest in midlife volunteering with the organization's need for long-term planning in volunteer and program development. Important components of this endeavor mirror those previously reported in the literature as necessary for collaborative success, including shared concerns, good timing, strong stakeholder groups, involvement of high-level visible leaders, and development of respect and trust. In addition, the author found that prior involvement between the university and the organization helped, as did the author's prior experience with collaborative efforts. Also discussed are the positive outcomes and challenges of undertaking academic research with community organizations.
24
Rasool, Zanib. "Collaborative working practices: Imagining better research partnerships." Research for All 1, no. 2 (2017): 310–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.18546/rfa.01.2.08.
Full textAbstract:
Collaborative research can bring communities to the heart of social research and provide a lens on the everyday experiences of ordinary people living extraordinary lives, capturing the funds of knowledge held in communities that exist outside the corridors of education institutions. If delivered in an ethical way, co-production can empower communities and elevate voices that traditionally have been on the margins. Through collaboration, we can bridge the knowledge gap that exists between communities and universities and raise community aspirations.
25
Eisenstadt, Nathan, and Josie McLellan. "Foregrounding co-production: Building research relationships in university–community collaborative research." Research for All 4, no. 2 (2020): 242–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/rfa.04.2.08.
Full textAbstract:
Emerging scholarship on university–community co-production rightly emphasizes the importance of preparatory work to build research partnerships. Such preparation creates the necessary common ground on which to build a meaningful collaborative relationship. Drawing on our experiences on a large university–community co-production experiment in historical mapping, we argue that this work is particularly important in partnerships where relationships are characterized by difference. If academics wish to work with individuals and groups beyond the bounds of those with whom they already agree, ‘foregrounding’ co-production is a critical component. We identify three dimensions of foregrounding co-production: practical, epistemological and affective. Each become increasingly important in cases where communities lack trust in, or actively mistrust, the university. Understanding and navigating difference, historical harm and power asymmetries can be time-intensive, and it may require a reorientation of the relationship between process and output in collaborative projects such that initially intended aims are not met. In order to encourage co-production across difference, we conclude that foregrounding should be valued as an end or ‘output’ in and of itself.
26
Rogers, Peter, Judy Burnside-Lawry, Jelenko Dragisic, and Colleen Mills. "Collaboration and communication." Disaster Prevention and Management 25, no. 1 (2016): 75–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/dpm-01-2015-0013.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a case study of Participatory Action Research (PAR), reporting on a collaboration, communication and disaster resilience workshop in Sydney, Australia. The goal of the workshop was to explore the challenges that organisations perceive as blockages to building community disaster resilience; and, through collaborative practitioner-led activities, identify which of those challenges could be best addressed through a deeper engagement with communication research. Design/methodology/approach – The authors link communication, collaboration and disaster resilience through the lens of PAR, detailing how communication and resilience experts can collaborate to improve disaster prevention, management and mitigation practice. Findings – The authors identify a number of theoretical considerations in understanding horizontal and vertical interfaces for improved communication. The authors also highlight how practical collaborative workshops can draw on communication researchers to facilitate collaborative resilience activities. PAR is shown to help move participant focus from resolving inter/intra-organisational tensions to facilitating public good, offering evidence-based recommendations which will foster a more reflexive and communicative approach to building disaster resilient communities. Research limitations/implications – This paper does not seek to apply community resilience to the general public, no community representatives were present at the workshop. This does not mean that the focus is on organisational resilience. Rather the authors apply PAR as a way to help organisations become more engaged with PAR, communication research and collaborative practice. PAR is a tool for organisations to use in building community resilience, but also a means to reflect on their practice. Whilst this should help organisations in building more resilient communities the take up of practice by participants outside of the workshop is a matter for future research. Practical implications – This method of collaborative resilience building could significantly improve the shared responsibility amongst key organisations, mobilising skills and building awareness of integrated resilience thinking in practice for stakeholders in disaster management activities. Originality/value – This paper provides original evidence-based research, showing the linkages between communication theory, collaboration practice and the tools used by organisations tasked with building community resilience. This innovative synthesis of skills can aid in building PAR led disaster resilience across prevention, preparation and mitigation activities for all potential hazards, threats and/or risks, however, it will be particularly of interest to organisations engaged in community resilience building activities.
27
KAPITANOFF, SUSAN, and CAROL PANDEY. "COLLABORATIVE TESTING IN STATISTICS: GROUP INTERACTION, ANXIETY, AND CLASS PERFORMANCE." STATISTICS EDUCATION RESEARCH JOURNAL 17, no. 2 (2018): 51–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.52041/serj.v17i2.158.
Full textAbstract:
Seventy-one students in two community college Statistics for the Social Sciences classes took six exams either individually or collaboratively. Assignment to test condition was randomly determined for each exam. Scores on collaboratively-taken exams were significantly higher than those for individually-taken exams, particularly for students with low GPAs and high test anxiety. Women’s, but not men’s, performances on the mid-term and final exams was related to the quality and quantity of their collaborative interactions. Thus, examining both quantity and quality of collaboration adds to our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of collaborative testing. First published November 2018 at Statistics Education Research Journal Archives
28
Siedlok, Frank, Paul Hibbert, and John Sillince. "From practice to collaborative community in interdisciplinary research contexts." Research Policy 44, no. 1 (2015): 96–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.07.018.
Full text
29
Craney, Chris L., and Franklin P. DeHaan. "A collaborative summer research program for community college students." Journal of Chemical Education 68, no. 11 (1991): 904. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed068p904.
Full text
30
Encarnacao, L. Miguel. "M1C2: Experiments in Community Building through Collaborative Research Dissemination." IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 35, no. 6 (2015): 4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/mcg.2015.126.
Full text
31
Gremillion, H. "Developing a collaborative methodology for research with community groups." Kotuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online 8, no. 1-2 (2013): 74–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1177083x.2013.848215.
Full text
32
Kovanen, Sunna. "Social entrepreneurship as a collaborative practice: Literature review and research agenda." Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation 17, no. 1 (2021): 97–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.7341/20211713.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: The aim of this article is, firstly, to explore and structure the emerging research on collaboration in social entrepreneurship, and secondly to tackle the identified gaps in the literature with a research agenda based on the communities and networks of practice theory. Methodology: The article relies on a systematic literature review, which summarizes the existing evidence base and critically evaluates major theoretical approaches. The analytical focus is on ambiguity and scales of collaboration. Findings: Three main research strands have been identified: first, community and public sector collaboration focusing on the participatory initiation of services by local communities; second, collaboration for resources and employment focusing on power relations between established organizations; and third, network- and micro-level collaboration focusing on collaborative governance of complex networks. A vaguely contextualized and non-critical approach to social entrepreneurship remains prominent; however, recent studies on community and network collaboration present nuanced approaches to scalarity and ambiguity. Implications for theory and practice: Existing research could benefit from explicit and broader theorization of collaboration, the analysis of ambiguous experiences and contexts and attending to the interplay between daily practices and larger-scale institutional change. The paper presents a compiled reference base and gives directions about future research and practice re-thinking social enterprise as a collaborative endeavor. Originality and value: The article contributes to social entrepreneurship studies by structuring the field and enhancing critical theory on the topic.
33
OSTASHEWSKI, MARCIA, SHAYLENE JOHNSON, GRAHAM MARSHALL, and CLIFFORD PAUL. "Fostering Reconciliation through Collaborative Research in Unama’ki: Engaging Communities through Indigenous Methodologies and Research-Creation." Yearbook for Traditional Music 52 (November 2020): 23–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ytm.2020.7.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article documents relationships, strategies, and activities involved in developing and carrying out collaborative community-engaged research for reconciliation, based on Indigenous methodologies and research-creation. It documents an example of Indigenous/non-Indigenous collaboration in Unama’ki (also known as Cape Breton, Canada), providing data towards the refinement of models of research designed to foster reconciliation, and contributing to a literature on Indigenous/non-Indigenous collaborations in ethnomusicology and related fields. While revealing some challenges in the process with respect to addressing local needs, it also describes transformations that can be achieved through effective collaboration, including ways in which universities can be involved.
34
Schensul, Jean J. "Organizing Community Research Partnerships in the Struggle against AIDS." Health Education & Behavior 26, no. 2 (1999): 266–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109019819902600209.
Full textAbstract:
Despite pharmaceutical advances, AIDS remains a health problem difficult to treat, leaving preventive interventions as the primary means of promoting risk avoidance. Increasing the capacity of university-based researchers to develop culturally, developmentally, and contextually appropriate AIDS prevention strategies requires the collaboration of community service and advocacy partners. To date, neither university researchers nor community providers have a great deal of partnership experience. Thus, a common language and set of experiences are yet to be developed. This article reviews the history of university-community and researchercommunity collaboration for AIDS research and intervention, placing the innovative work of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Center for AIDS Prevention Studies and its community and foundation partnerships among those efforts at the forefront of the community-university dialogue. It concludes with suggestions derived from the collaborative work of UCSF researchers and community service partners to strengthen efforts to develop theory, research methods, and results that are immediately useful and productive of long-term prevention research efforts.
35
Ratten, Vanessa. "Encouraging collaborative entrepreneurship in developing countries: the current challenges and a research agenda." Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies 6, no. 3 (2014): 298–308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jeee-05-2014-0015.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the current challenges of collaborative entrepreneurship in developing countries. By focusing on developing countries, a research agenda is proposed that considers how collaborative entrepreneurship differs depending on a country’s level of economic and social development. Design/methodology/approach – A literature review was conducted on entrepreneurship in developing countries to evaluate the financial and non-financial reasons for collaborative entrepreneurship. Findings – The analysis of current challenges faced by entrepreneurs in developing countries finds that there are a number of different types of collaborative entrepreneurship conducted. These include cultural collaboration, government attitudes and society benefits, community innovations and collaborative capabilities. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the literature on developing countries by highlighting the collaborative entrepreneurial approach utilized by individuals, businesses and governments to succeed in the competitive global marketplace.
36
Young, Christine L. "Social Work Roles in Collaborative Research." Social Work in Health Care 11, no. 4 (1986): 71–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/j010v11n04_06.
Full text
37
Tucker, Melanie T., Dwight W. Lewis, Pamela Payne Foster, et al. "Community-Based Participatory Research–Speed Dating." Health Promotion Practice 17, no. 6 (2016): 775–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1524839916673612.
Full textAbstract:
Developing meaningful community-based participatory relationships between researchers and the community can be challenging. The overall success of a community-based participatory relationship should be predicated on commitment and respect from empowered stakeholders. Prior to developing the technique discussed in this article, we hypothesized that the process of fostering relationships between researchers and the community was much like a social relationship: It has to develop organically and cannot be forced. To address this challenge, we developed a community-based participatory research–speed dating technique to foster relationships based on common interests, which we call CBPR-SD. This article describes the logistics of implementing CBPR-SD to foster scholarly collaborations. As part of a federally funded community-based research project, the speed dating technique was implemented for 10 researchers and 11 community leaders with a goal of developing scholarly collaborative groups who will submit applications for community-based research grants. In the end, four collaborative groups developed through CBPR-SD, three (75%) successfully submitted grant applications to fund pilot studies addressing obesity-related disparities in rural communities. Our preliminary findings suggest that CBPR-SD is a successful tool for promoting productive scholarly relationships between researchers and community leaders.
38
Mayan, Maria, Sanchia Lo, Merin Oleschuk, Anna Paucholo, and Daley Laing. "Leadership in Community-Based Participatory Research: Individual to Collective." Engaged Scholar Journal: Community-Engaged Research, Teaching, and Learning 2, no. 2 (2017): 11–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.15402/esj.v2i2.162.
Full textAbstract:
Multi-sector collaborative partnerships hold much promise in tackling seemingly intractable and complex social issues. However, they often encounter many challenges in achieving their goals. Leadership can play an important role in reducing the impact of factors that threaten a multi-sector partnership’s success. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships are collaborative and, in many cases, multi-sectored. While there is a developing literature and practice on multi-sector, collaborative partnerships, leadership in CBPR is relatively unexplored, especially at various partnership stages (i.e., formation, implementation, maintenance, and accomplishment of goal). Through the method of focused ethnography, we explored the research question “How is leadership exercised during the formation stage of a CBPR partnership?” Eighteen partners (government, community, and university sectors) were interviewed about the leadership during the formation stage of their partnership, and data were qualitatively content-analyzed. Partners explained that leadership was exercised during the formation stage through (1) individual characteristics, (2) actions, and (3) as a collective. Our findings illustrate that CBPR leadership shares many of the characteristics of traditional leadership and adapts them to support the collaborative process of CBPR, leading to a collective form of leadership. These findings have implications for the study and practice of CBPR leadership.
39
LeClair, Amy, Jean J. Lim, and Carolyn Rubin. "Lessons learned from developing and sustaining a community-research collaborative through translational research." Journal of Clinical and Translational Science 2, no. 2 (2018): 79–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2018.7.
Full textAbstract:
IntroductionThe goal of this project was to document the current state of a community-academic partnership, identifying early successes and lessons learned.MethodsWe employed qualitative methods, semi-structured interviews and document analysis, from 2 data sources to (1) show how the principles of community-based participatory research are enacted through the activities of Addressing Disparities in Asian Populations through Translational Research (ADAPT) and (2) elucidate the barriers and facilitators to adhering to those principles from the perspectives of the members themselves.ResultsIn addition to established community-based participatory research values, understanding individuals’ motivations for participation, the challenges aligning the priorities of community organizations and academic partners, and definitions of success are themes that emerged as key to the process of maintaining this partnership.ConclusionAs the emphasis on community-academic partnerships grows, there is potential for clinical and translational science awards to use community engagement to facilitate translational research beyond the traditional medical spheres of influence and to forge relationships with affected communities.
40
Taylor, Natalie Greene, Ursula Gorham, Paul T. Jaeger, and John Carlo Bertot. "IT and Collaborative Community Services." International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age 1, no. 1 (2014): 91–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijpada.2014010106.
Full textAbstract:
The role that the Internet has played in redefining the activities of public sector organizations is well-documented. What has yet to be fully explored, however, are recent collaborations among community-oriented entities (local government agencies, public libraries, and non-profit organizations) to provide enhanced services through innovative uses of information technology. These collaborative community services are enhanced by information technology, but also framed within the context of the organizations supporting the services. Using data from the 2011-2012 Public Library Funding and Technology Access Survey (PLFTAS), and drawing upon ongoing research into e-government partnerships between libraries, government agencies, and community organizations as well as community-based civic engagement initiatives, this paper will frame this issue within the contexts of local e-government in the United States; the relationship between public libraries, e-government, and the Internet; and innovative partnerships between public libraries, local government, and nonprofit entities. The article discusses both best practices and common challenges among these partnerships as a guide to future projects.
41
Grosse, Matti, Jakob Pohlisch, and Jakob Korbel. "Triggers of Collaborative Innovation in Online User Communities." Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 4, no. 4 (2018): 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/joitmc4040059.
Full textAbstract:
This study contributes to the understanding of collaborative innovation in online user communities. Aside from providing evidence for the existence of these communities, prior research focused on users’ motivations, backgrounds, and roles at the micro level but largely neglected to examine the effects of individual user activities on joint activities at the community level. By applying a netnographic research design, which is followed by a content analysis step and logistic regression analysis, we explore to what degree different user activities trigger collaborative innovation inside a community. We find two factors inherent to the initial post of a thread, problem complexity and collaboration intention, which explain the probability of collaborative innovation. The likelihood of joint activities is raised significantly if the contribution of a user ranks high on both dimensions. By quantifying collaborative user innovation, we hope to encourage the inclusion of user activities in future policy considerations. Moreover, understanding the effects of individual user activities at the community level may help companies to understand users of technologies better and to identify opportunities for collaboration.
42
Flocks, Joan, and Paul Monaghan. "Collaborative Research with Farmworkers in Environmental Justice." Practicing Anthropology 25, no. 1 (2003): 6–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.17730/praa.25.1.u055m504677t440w.
Full textAbstract:
Environmental injustice occurs when a particular population, most often low-income people of color, is exposed disproportionately to an environmental health hazard. On the continuum of an environmentally unjust situation, there are several stages and levels at which inequities occur. A corporation makes a decision to locate a waste incinerator in a neighborhood that, because of historical socioeconomic discrimination, has become a low-income African American community in an industrial zone. Community members are stonewalled and intimidated at a public hearing about a local environmental health problem by industry and government officials who sit far away from the audience and use technical jargon to describe the issue. Native-Americans lose an important diet staple and economic activity when an industry's runoff contaminates the fish in a body of water. These examples illustrate geographical, procedural, and sociocultural inequities contributing to environmental injustices.
43
Jackson, Jason. "Ethnography and Ethnographers in Museum-Community Partnerships." Practicing Anthropology 22, no. 4 (2000): 29–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.17730/praa.22.4.30l3vn01482324x4.
Full textAbstract:
During the 1999 American Association of Museums (AAM) meetings, museum workers reflected on ways in which their institutions could become more relevant. Social structures that have supported museums are rapidly changing and in which cultural diversity is increasingly recognized as both a social value and as a pragmatic challenge for public institutions. Although the forms they take are almost as diverse as the American museum community itself, models of direct collaboration between museums and specific local communities (ethnic, religious, occupational, etc.) are becoming a standard part of museum-based exhibition and research. While this common pattern is emerging, there are wide gaps existing between the aspirations and rhetoric of museum advocates of collaboration and the real work done throughout the United States. What is often missing in collaborative exhibition projects exploring local artistic, cultural, or historical traditions are the values and perspectives that are the common background of professional cultural anthropology and folklore research. In this essay I present, as a case study, an account of a collaborative exhibition project at Tulsa's Gilcrease Museum where I, until recently, served as Curator of Anthropology.
44
Weaver, Sally P. "Increasing Residency Research Output While Cultivating Community Research Collaborations." Family Medicine 50, no. 6 (2018): 460–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.22454/fammed.2018.734196.
Full textAbstract:
Background and Objectives: Having a research curriculum in addition to hosting a resident research day stimulates research activity in residency programs. Research collaborations outside an individual residency program may also promote research in residency. This paper describes a community-wide health research forum that engages faculty and residents in research while bringing together potential research collaborators from the community. Methods: A yearly research forum has been held at a large community-based family medicine residency program for the past 10 years. This forum invites both residency faculty and residents to present scholarly works, and also invites researchers from the community to present health-related research. Presenters outside the residency come from hospital systems, the local university, other residency programs, and community private physicians. Results: Peer-reviewed research publications have increased greatly since the advent of the research forum in 2006, with six publications from 1997-2006 and 26 from 2007-2016. Greater increases in numbers of peer reviewed presentations were also seen. Collaborative research has occurred between residency faculty and multiple departments at the local university including the business school, social work, public health, physiology, and statistics. There are now 28 collaborative projects completed or in progress. Conclusions: Development and implementation of a regional health research event has been a success in increasing faculty and resident research productivity. The even greater success however, is the progress made in advancing research collaborations between the local university and the residency program.
45
Grinstead, Olga A., Barry Zack, and Bonnie Faigeles. "Collaborative Research to Prevent HIV among Male Prison Inmates and Their Female Partners." Health Education & Behavior 26, no. 2 (1999): 225–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109019819902600206.
Full textAbstract:
Despite the need for targeted HIV prevention interventions for prison inmates, institutional and access barriers have impeded development and evaluation of such programs. Over the past 6 years, the authors have developed a unique collaborative relationship to develop and evaluate HIV prevention interventions for prison inmates. The collaboration includes an academic research institution (the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies at the University of California, San Francisco), a community-based organization (Centerforce), and the staff and inmate peer educators inside a state prison. In this ongoing collaboration, the authors have developed and evaluated a series of HIV prevention interventions for prison inmates and for women who visit prison inmates. Results of these studies support the feasibility and effectiveness of HIV prevention programs for inmates and their partners both in prison and in the community. Access and institutional barriers to HIV intervention research in prisons can be overcome through the development of collaborative research partnerships.
46
Binet, Andrew, Vedette Gavin, Leigh Carroll, and Mariana Arcaya. "Designing and Facilitating Collaborative Research Design and Data Analysis Workshops: Lessons Learned in the Healthy Neighborhoods Study." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 3 (2019): 324. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030324.
Full textAbstract:
One impediment to expanding the prevalence and quality of community-engaged research is a shortage of instructive resources for collaboratively designing research instruments and analyzing data with community members. This article describes how a consortium of community residents, grassroots community organizations, and academic and public institutions implemented collaborative research design and data analysis processes as part of a participatory action research (PAR) study investigating the relationship between neighborhoods and health in the greater Boston area. We report how nine different groups of community residents were engaged in developing a multi-dimensional survey instrument, generating and testing hypotheses, and interpreting descriptive statistics and preliminary findings. We conclude by reflecting on the importance of balancing planned strategies for building and sustaining resident engagement with improvisational facilitation that is responsive to residents’ characteristics, interests and needs in the design and execution of collaborative research design and data analysis processes.
47
Sullivan, Myrtis, George Balch, Lina Cramer, Marilyn Willis, and Noel Chavez. "Benefits, Barriers and Enablers of University—Community Research Collaboration: Input from Health and Social Service Agencies." Social Marketing Quarterly 6, no. 2 (2000): 8–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15245004.2000.9961099.
Full textAbstract:
Increasingly, it has become clear to social marketers and others that partnerships among organizations are needed to accomplish behavior change and achieve social objectives. While many still take an organization- centered approach, there has been a marked increase in the number of community-based collaborative research endeavors connecting academics and community agencies in mutual investigation of salient problems. Currently, much of the literature on these efforts is reported by academicians and reflects their perspectives or perceptions of agency viewpoints. More input is needed from the agency perspective to ensure a more balanced understanding of the significant role community partners play in the development and implementation of research that leads to improved health status of communities and other social objectives. To this end, focus groups were conducted to give community-based agencies the opportunity to share their insights and give their perspective regarding the benefits and barriers to effective collaboration. Representatives of agencies from the Chicago area with experience in collaborative research participated, and results were reviewed and corroborated by additional community agencies. The most common benefits sought by agencies were evaluation and needs assessment. Participants cite the failure of researchers and agencies to take the time to understand and try to meet each other's needs as the main barrier to effective collaborative efforts.
48
Brock, Sheri J., Danielle Wadsworth, Shelby Foote, and Mary E. Rudisill. "Utilization of Collaborations to Engage Children in Physical Activity: A Community-Based Research Approach." Kinesiology Review 6, no. 4 (2017): 323–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/kr.2017-0029.
Full textAbstract:
Institutions of higher education have a responsibility to prioritize the needs of society and local communities. One essential need prevalent in all communities is to address the rise of obesity and health risks due to lack of participation in physical activity. In the United States, children spend a small percentage of time engaged in physical activity, and engagement decreases further in adolescence and adulthood. Collaborative partnerships between kinesiology faculty at universities and community organizations are one avenue for engaging children in physical activity. Partnerships must be multilevel and community wide to evoke change and have long-term impact and sustainability. Within the context of community-based research, we propose a three-step framework for establishing collaborative partnerships: (1) determining the needs of partners; (2) discussing expertise, services, and philosophy; and (3) providing a quality product. In addition, we outline and illustrate our experiences when collaborating with community partners to promote physical activity.
49
Ishimaru, Ann M., Aditi Rajendran, Charlene Montaño Nolan, and Megan Bang. "Community Design Circles: Co-designing Justice and Wellbeing in Family-Community-Research Partnerships." Journal of Family Diversity in Education 3, no. 2 (2018): 38–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.53956/jfde.2018.133.
Full textAbstract:
Researchers and practitioners of family engagement have long called for a move beyond conventional deficit-based family-school partnerships. In response, a burgeoning movement in the field has sought to identify and enact new forms of collaboration with nondominant families and communities, in terms of both change-making andthe process of research itself. In this article, we bridge the fields of family engagement and design-based research to conceptualize and illustrate a solidarity-driven process of partnership we undertook with families and communities of color, educators, and other researchers towards community-defined wellbeing and education justice. We offer community design circles as a methodological evolution aimed at reclaiming the central agentic role of families and communities of color in transforming educational research and practice. We illustrate three co-design dimensions with vignettes from a national-level participatory design research project called the Family Leadership Design Collaborative: 1) building from and with families’ and communities’ definitions of wellbeing and justice; 2) disrupting normative, asymmetrical dynamics; and 3) building capacity for social dreaming and changemaking.
50
Willis, Anne, Deena R. Loeffler, and Mandi Pratt-Chapman. "Building an oncology community of practice." Journal of Clinical Oncology 34, no. 3_suppl (2016): 47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/jco.2016.34.3_suppl.47.
Full textAbstract:
47 Background: Oncology patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) helps stakeholders, including patients, clinicians and policymakers, make decisions about care; yet, research findings may take years to be put into practice. With the increasing availability of survivorship PCOR, better methods are needed to disseminate and implement findings quickly and effectively. Engaging multiple stakeholders is essential to meet this need, and Communities of Practice (CoP) are effective in increasing collaboration across organizations and stakeholders. Methods: The George Washington University (GW) Cancer Institute created a CoP as a knowledge management approach to break down professional and organizational barriers, support learning for people new to the field and facilitate collaboration within and across organizations. The goal of the CoP is to create stronger links across researchers, healthcare professionals and patients by facilitating the sharing of survivorship information and resources. These linkages will result in enhanced dissemination of evidence-based practices. Results: The CoP is housed within the Generation and Translation of Evidence (GATE) website. The site features user-generated content, including descriptions of research findings and evidence-based interventions to succinctly provide information for a variety of stakeholders to guide decision-making as well as descriptions of best practices and lessons learned to capture practice-based efforts that can drive research. GATE features a question-and-answer bank with evidence-based responses by survivorship experts. The CoP includes Ask the Expert sessions to provide researchers an opportunity to interact with clinicians and patients to guide research dissemination. It also includes Special Interest Groups for researchers to create collaborations and advance research agendas. An e-newsletter highlights new GATE content and opportunities to collaborate. Conclusions: There is a clear need to better disseminate and implement survivorship PCOR evidence to improve cancer care delivery. The GATE website will aid in more rapid implementation of survivorship PCOR evidence into clinical practice and foster collaborative dissemination and implementation efforts.