Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 29, 2026

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Process and outcome constructs for evaluating community-based participatory research projects: a matrix of existing
Jennifer A Sandoval1, Julie Lucero, John Oetzel
1University of Central Florida, Nicholson School of Communication, Orlando, FL 32816, USA.
Abstract:
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has been widely used in public health research in the last decade as an approach to develop culturally centered interventions and collaborative research processes in which communities are directly involved in the construction and implementation of these interventions and in other application of findings. Little is known, however, about CBPR pathways of change and how these academic-community collaborations may contribute to successful outcomes. A new health CBPR conceptual model (Wallerstein N, Oetzel JG, Duran B et al. CBPR: What predicts outcomes? In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N (eds). Communication Based Participatory Research, 2nd edn. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Co., 2008) suggests that relationships between four components: context, group dynamics, the extent of community-centeredness in intervention and/or research design and the impact of these participatory processes on CBPR system change and health outcomes. This article seeks to identify instruments and measures in a comprehensive literature review that relates to these distinct components of the CBPR model and to present them in an organized and indexed format for researcher use. Specifically, 258 articles were identified in a review of CBPR (and related) literature from 2002 to 2008. Based on this review and from recommendations of a national advisory board, 46 CBPR instruments were identified and each was reviewed and coded using the CBPR logic model. The 46 instruments yielded 224 individual measures of characteristics in the CBPR model. While this study does not investigate the quality of the instruments, it does provide information about reliability and validity for specific measures. Group dynamics proved to have the largest number of identified measures, while context and CBPR system and health outcomes had the least. Consistent with other summaries of instruments, such as Granner and Sharpe's inventory (Granner ML, Sharpe PA. Evaluating community coalition characteristics and functioning: a summary of measurement tools. Health Educ Res 2004; 19: 514-32), validity and reliability information were often lacking, and one or both were only available for 65 of the 224 measures. This summary of measures provides a place to start for new and continuing partnerships seeking to evaluate their progress.
More Related Videos
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
10:39Qualitative and Quantitative Validation of Tools with Rating Scales Aimed at Assessing the Quality of University Service-Learning
Published on: August 29, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Nursing Evaluation
Section...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care evaluation by...
Methods to Assess Microbial Communities
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies.