Podcast Interview Transcript

In each volume of Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, the editors select one article for our Beyond the Manuscript podcast interview with the authors. Beyond the Manuscript provides authors with the opportunity to tell listeners what they would want to know about the project beyond what went into the final manuscript. Beyond the Manuscript podcasts are available for download on the journal's website (www.press-dev.jhu.edu/journals/progress_in_community_health_partnerships/multimedia.html). This Beyond the Manuscript podcast is with Jennifer Hatcher of the University of Kentucky, College of Nursing, and lead author of "Human Subjects Protection Training for Community Workers: An Example From "Faith Moves Mountains" and Katie Dollarhide, Project Manager for the University of Kentucky's Faith Moves Mountains, a cervical cancer intervention project. Dr. Crystal Wiley, an Editorial Fellow at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, conducted the interview. The following is an edited transcript of the Beyond the Manuscript podcast.

* * *

Crystal Wiley: This project is entitled Human Subjects Protection Training for Community Workers: An Example From Faith Moves Mountains. The rationale for this study was to determine the best approach to training community workers who are involved in community-based participatory research (CBPR) projects.

I think that what you all found was that there was not much literature in the setting of CBPR on who should receive training, and what type of training should be offered,Also, there are some real-life concerns for community members in how to meet official requirements of institutions for human subjects training.

So the objectives of this study were really to develop a training package tailored to community members on protecting human subjects. What you all did was to develop a training module, which consisted of an educational module that was presented in a 1-day session, which included a PowerPoint presentation, as well as written materials for the community workers. Is that correct? Have I left out anything that you want to add?

Jennifer Hatcher: No. That's it.

Crystal Wiley: Okay.

Jennifer Hatcher: Katie?

Katie Dollarhide: No, that sounds right.

Crystal Wiley: Okay. Great. The only other thing I'll say is that, , in order to get your results, what you did at the end of the presentation was to give each worker a written test, to evaluate the knowledge of the content that you presented.

So each of the workers were given the test, and those were scored. It sounds like you received positive feedback from all those who participated, as well as a 100% pass rate.

Jennifer Hatcher: Yes. So good, so far.

Crystal Wiley: This interview will be divided into questions directed at the origin of the project, the partnership aspect, the design and implementation of the project, and the impact and dissemination. We will start talking about the impetus for developing this training program. So can you tell me a little bit more about what led you all to develop this program?

Jennifer Hatcher: We developed this program in response to Katie and Sherry, who are our project staff. Katie's the project manager who took the more cumbersome human subject training that we all take as academicians. We take a CITI, or a Dunn and Chadwick. They took the same one that we take.

They found that it was complex, and that it might have been a bit broad for community workers to take, encompassing things that they might not need to know about necessarily.

Katie and Sherry expressed concerns about people—our lay health workers taking the same test and being intimidated by it, it being at such a high literacy level and, talking about things that they may not need to know.

So that got us to thinking that we might need a human subjects protection module that was a bit more focused on the things that they needed to know, and that was more readable, and at a level that any community worker could certainly understand.

Crystal Wiley: It sounds like this program was initiated from the participants, specifically your project managers. Did your Office of Research Integrity have anything to do...