The SoloSIRENs Collective’s production Cessair, staged in South Dublin in the summer of 2021, represents the second production of this burgeoning company. The Collective is a community-based theatre group comprised of an all-female ensemble that has been creating together since 2019. For this production, it used the Irish myth of Cessair as a starting point to consider the female experience, and invited women from across the world to share their stories and lived experiences. Drawing on close observation of the devising process, analysis of the final production, and conversations with members of the Collective, this article argues that the production should be considered as an example of feminist performed ethnography.

Inadequate training in the interpersonal skills of conducting informed consent conversations has long been noted as a challenge for clinical research recruitment and retention. To address this critical gap, Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute developed regular trainings for clinical research coordinators and other research staff on the practical skills of communicating informed consent using community members as simulated patients for role-playing exercises. In this paper, we assess the reach and effectiveness of these trainings and describe the impact of employing community stakeholders as simulated patients. We found that by embedding community members in the trainings, clinical research coordinators get to hear diverse perspectives, experience a range of patient responses, and learn from the lived experience of the communities that research tries to serve. Utilizing community members as trainers also helps to dismantle traditional power dynamics by demonstrating the organization’s commitment to inclusiveness and community engagement. Based on these findings, we suggest that training on informed consent include more simulated consent exercises that feature interaction with community members who can provide real-time feedback to coordinators.

Participatory research denotes the engagement and meaningful involvement of the community of interest across multiple stages of investigation, from design to data collection, analysis, and publication. Traditionally, people with first-hand experience of psychiatric diagnoses, service users, and those living with a psychosocial disability have been seen objects rather than agents of research and knowledge production, despite the ethical and practical benefits of their involvement. The state of the art of knowledge about participatory research in mental health Brazil is poorly understood outside of its local context. The purpose of this article was to conduct a scoping review of participatory and user-led research in mental health in Brazil. We identified 20 articles that met eligibility criteria. Participation in research was not treated as separate from participation in shaping mental health policy, driving care, or the broader right to fully participate in societal life and enjoy social and civil rights. Studies identified several obstacles to full participation, including the biomedical model, primacy of academic and scientific knowledge, and systemic barriers. Our extraction, charting, and synthesis yielded four themes: power, knowledge, autonomy, and empowerment. Participation in this context must address the intersecting vulnerabilities experienced by those who are both Brazilian and labeled as having a mental illness. Participatory research and Global South leadership must foreground local epistemologies that can contribute to the global debate about participation and mental health research.

The COVID-19 pandemic raised the importance of adaptive capacity and preparedness when engaging historically marginalized populations in research and practice. The Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics in Underserved Populations’ COVID-19 Equity Evidence Academy Series (RADx-UP EA) is a virtual, national, interactive conference model designed to support and engage community-academic partnerships in a collaborative effort to improve practices that overcome disparities in SARS-CoV-2 testing and testing technologies. The RADx-UP EA promotes information sharing, critical reflection and discussion, and creation of translatable strategies for health equity. Staff and faculty from the RADx-UP Coordination and Data Collection Center developed three EA events with diverse geographic, racial, and ethnic representation of attendees from RADx-UP community-academic project teams: February 2021 (n = 319); November 2021 (n = 242); and September 2022 (n = 254). Each EA event included a data profile; 2-day, virtual event; event summary report; community dissemination product; and an evaluation strategy. Operational and translational delivery processes were iteratively adapted for each EA across one or more of five adaptive capacity domains: assets, knowledge and learning, social organization, flexibility, and innovation. The RADx-UP EA model can be generalized beyond RADx-UP and tailored by community and academic input to respond to local or national health emergencies.

The Community Research Liaison Model (CRLM) is a novel model to facilitate community-engaged research (CEnR) and community–academic research partnerships focused on health priorities identified by the community. This model, informed by the Principles of Community Engagement, builds trust among rural communities and expands capacity for community and investigator-initiated research. We describe the CRLM development process and how it is operationalized today. We followed a multi-phase process to design and implement a community engagement model that could be replicated. The resulting CRLM moves community–academic research collaborations from objectives to outputs using a conceptual framework that specifies our guiding principles, objectives, and actions to facilitate the objectives (i.e., capacity, motivations, and partners), and outputs. The CRLM has been fully implemented across Oregon. Six Community Research Liaisons collectively support 18 predominantly rural Oregon counties. Since 2017, the liaison team has engaged with communities on nearly 300 community projects. The CRLM has been successful in facilitating CEnR and community–academic research partnerships. The model has always existed on a dynamic foundation and continues to be responsive to the lessons learned by the community and researchers. The model is expanding across Oregon as an equitable approach to addressing health disparities across the state.

Gaps in the implementation of effective interventions impact nearly all cancer prevention and control strategies in the US including Massachusetts. To close these implementation gaps, evidence-based interventions must be rapidly and equitably implemented in settings serving racially, ethnically, socioeconomically, and geographically diverse populations. This paper provides a brief overview of The Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity (ISCCCE) and describes how we have operationalized our commitment to a robust community-engaged center that aims to close these gaps. We describe how ISCCCE is organized and how the principles of community-engaged research are embedded across the center. Principles of community engagement have been operationalized across all components of ISCCCE. We have intentionally integrated these principles throughout all structures and processes and have developed evaluation strategies to assess whether the quality of our partnerships reflects the principles. ISCCCE is a comprehensive community-engaged infrastructure for studying efficient, pragmatic, and equity-focused implementation and adaptation strategies for cancer prevention in historically and currently disadvantaged communities with built-in methods to evaluate the quality of community engagement. This engaged research center is designed to maximize the impact and relevance of implementation research on cancer control in community health centers.

Colorado has consistently had one of the highest rates of suicide in the United States, and El Paso County has the highest number of suicide and firearm-related suicide deaths within the state. Community-based solutions like those of the Suicide Prevention Collaborative of El Paso County may be more effective in preventing suicide as they are specific to local issues, sensitive to local culture, and informed by local data, community members, and stakeholders.

Residents of rural areas are underrepresented in research. The aim of this narrative review was to explore studies describing the effectiveness of community engagement strategies with rural communities to promote participant recruitment and participation in clinical research. Following PRISMA guidelines, this narrative review was conducted in June 2020. Our search strategy was built around keywords that included community-engaged research, rural community, and recruitment strategies into clinical research. Content-related descriptive statistics were summarized. The selected articles were distributed into categories of levels of community engagement: inform, consult, involve, collaborate, or co-lead. The search resulted in 2,473 identified studies of which forty-eight met inclusion criteria. Of these, 47.1% were randomized controlled trials. The most common levels of engagement were consultation (n = 24 studies) and collaboration (n = 15), while very few focused on informing (n = 2) and co-leadership (n = 2). Strategies, limitations, and findings are discussed for each level of community engagement. This narrative addressed a gap in knowledge regarding participant recruitment in rural communities in relation to assistance from community members. Community engagement contributed to the success of the research, especially in recruitment, participation, and building trust and partnership.

Each year, hundreds of international researchers enter Greenland to conduct scientific fieldwork. Historically, they have had little interaction with local communities and scientists at Greenland research institutes. Recognising that collaboration between Greenland and the United States can yield better research, consider more diverse perspectives, articulate the benefits of research to Greenland society, and train the next generation in a collaborative framework, representatives from both countries have been engaged in a series of events to cultivate bilateral relationships. Here, we describe the process of these events (workshops, conference sessions, and public dialogues), the findings, and the outcomes that have followed. Prior to this focused engagement, United States and Greenland scientists typically pursued their research independently. Since the engagement, more researchers from both countries have successfully partnered to obtain funding for collaborative research. Furthermore, development of a bilateral collaboration network is underway. The focused approach on bilateral engagement also proved essential for maintaining research and other activities during the global pandemic. When United States researchers were prevented from entering Greenland, their Greenland partners were able to continue the fieldwork, ensuring that progress was not lost. Future international projects can build on these successes to expand collaborative and interdisciplinary research in Greenland.