Latino Health Riverside Greer Sullivan & Mary Figueroa
Latino Health Riverside Project was funded through a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Eugene Washington PCORI Engagement Award (1289)
Latino Health Riverside Goals Engage 3 predominantly Latino neighborhoods in • Riverside Identify communities' health priorities • Build capacity for community engaged research • Community members • CBO’s • Academics • Situation No minority owned CBO focusing on health • Very little prior community discussion about health •
Riverside, California
Latino Health Riverside Steering Committee
In Home Meetings • Community representatives identified host families • We supplied invitations and meals • We prepared a series of questions as facilitation • Anthropologist took notes
Four Priority Areas • Access to care • Management of chronic health condition • Neighborhood safety • MENTAL HEALTH
Modified Deliberative Democracy Kettering Model Which is more important? Preventing mental illness or improving treatment for • those who already have a mental health problem? Addressing mental health among children (young • adults) or adults (and seniors)? Encouraging service use by providing community • education about mental health and stigma or linking to services ? Improving existing services or offer more services • in community ?
Thank you! Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) • Mike Pazzani, Vice Chancellor for Research and Economic • Development, UC Riverside In- Home Meetings host families • UC Riverside Participants: Christina Reaves, Ann Cheney, • Juliet McMullin, Rita Rodriguez, Michelle Jaramillo MPH Student (University of Washington): Alejandra Cabral • Parkview Community Hospital and neighborhood community • centers Community Based Organization Partners: • Casa Blanca Home of Neighborly Services • Arlington Temporary Assistance • Community Settlement Association •
Steering Committee Patricia Cano Joey Abadilla • • • Greer Sullivan Carmen Martinez Gloria Perez • • • Ann Cheney Darlene DeBayona Mary Alvarez • Christina Reaves • • • Mary Figueroa Morris Mendoza Michelle Anguiano • • • Alejandra Cabral Suzanna Medina Eldaa Rivera • • Andrea Nieto LuAnna Jauergui • • William Leon Diana Alvarez • • Hurnan Vongsachang Marci Aguirre • • Katherine Tsai Lily Gallegos • • Araceli Damian Sylvia Aguirre-Aguilar • • Jocelyn Guerrero- Carlos Fernandez • • Cardenas
Deliberative Democracy Kettering Model • Name the issue • Frame the issue • Prepare issue book • Facilitate deliberation • Find common ground • Invite participants to be part of the solution
Comparing Focus Groups and Deliberative Forums • Inductive analysis: similar themes • Deductive analysis: − Forum participants more tuned to o Structural inequalities o Structural solutions o Community initiated solutions − Forum participants expressed more hopelessness − Activation
Comparing Public Deliberation Methods Sites: Chicago, Sacramento, Durham, Silver Spring Participants: 1774 recruited (about 75% show rate) 55% women, 45% college, 90% white, 12% >65y/o Design: Five arm RCT comparing Four Deliberative methods • Reading materials only • Topic: “Should individual patients or their doctors be able to make any health decisions no matter what the evidence of medical effectiveness shows, or should society specify some boundaries for these decisions?” Outcomes: Knowledge about medical evidence Attitudes about using evidence in medical decision- making
Comparing Deliberative Methods: Results Deliberation increased knowledge and shifted attitudes • (deliberation vs. RMO) All methods changed either knowledge or one attitude • measure Citizens Panel and Brief Citizens Deliberation were • superior in increasing knowledge Citizens Panel most effective in changing attitudes • “”Public deliberation may be particularly useful for • healthcare issues where members have limited knowledge yet hold strong beliefs.” Participant activation?? •
Recommend
More recommend
