Ethics & Engagement across the Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programmes
The Fourth Journal Club discussion looked at experience of and learning from the Tak Province Community Ethics Advisory Board on the Thai/Myanmar border.
The summary of the discussion can be found here:Summary%20of%20JC%20on%20Tak%20Community%20Advisory%20Board.docx
The paper that was discussed by Khin et al (2013) can be found here
Participants to the phone conference may want to add to the summary notes or contribute further reflections. Other members of the ‘Engaging with Impact’ group should feel free to read the summary and paper and contribute insights of their own.
How to best evaluate Community Advisory Boards was one topic people wanted to discuss further on-line, so please do add your comments on this issue.
As with all discussions on e-MOPs, after this initial notification you will need to actively choose to ‘follow’ the discussion by clicking on the ‘follow’ option in the discussion forum box
The Journal Club papers and summaries can also be accessed from the 'Resources' box on the ‘Engaging with Impact’ home page
One evaluation suggestion that came up in our journal club discussion was the potential to track the flow of communication within and beyond the Community Advisory Board (CAB) to the community. Such an assessment might include what picture was being drawn of any particular research endeavour and how much understanding there was of health research process.
Another element of evaluation that was more implicit in the discussion was related to the ‘representativeness’ of the CAB – how wide was participation and was there involvement of key groups likely to be affected centrally by the research. Still another aspect for potential assessment was the degree to which the CAB focused on the specifics of the current health research and how much it identified wider health and social problems that were of importance for the community.
Are these areas that people have tried to evaluate in their work with CABs, I wonder?