Participatory research in health promotion: An appraisal tool

George, A., Daniel, A., & Green, L. (2006-2007). Appraising and funding participatory research in health promotion. International Quarterly of Community Health Education 26, 171-187.

Description

The aims of this article are, first, to provide a summary of the field of participatory research; second, to offer an appraisal tool for users to determine the extent to which projects and research proposals align with the principles of participatory research; and, third, to link participatory research to research in the health promotion (application) field.The article uses systematic review methods and expert consultation to create a summary and definition of participatory research. It also includess a multi-item checklist meant for appraising the extent to which projects and research proposals align with the principles of participatory research.

The checklist is divided into the following six domains:

  1. Participants and the nature of their involvement (6 questions)
  2. Origin of the research question (2 questions)
  3. Purpose of the research (4 questions)
  4. Process and context: Methodological implications (6 questions)
  5. Opportunities to address the issue of interest (3 questions)
  6. Nature of the research outcomes (4 questions)

Each question has a multiple choice answer format, with answer options addressing the question topic's relevance to participatory research (on an increasing scale).

Steps for Using Method/Tool

The tool is a multi-item checklist that is divided into six domains. Each item on the list is a question that assesses a particular part of the research and qualifies the level of appropriateness for participatory research. For example, question (a) in the first domain asks, "Is the community of interest clearly described or defined?” The best answer will vary depending on the question and the project being evaluated. The tool’s instructions indicate that there should only be one answer for each question, and that if a question is not applicable, users can simply skip the question. (There is a suggestion that “Not Applicable” options be added to each question.) Otherwise, there is no threshold, scoring system or other algorithm to apply to the checklist.

These summaries are written by the NCCMT to condense and to provide an overview of the resources listed in the Registry of Methods and Tools and to give suggestions for their use in a public health context. For more information on individual methods and tools included in the review, please consult the authors/developers of the original resources.

We have provided the resources and links as a convenience and for informational purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by McMaster University of any of the products, services or opinions of the external organizations, nor have the external organizations endorsed their resources and links as provided by McMaster University. McMaster University bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external sites.

Have you used this resource? Share your story!