SRF013: Conceptualising, operationalising, and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review
Meghan Gilfoyle, MSc; Jon Salsberg, PhD; Anne MacFarlane, PhD, MA
Context: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has gained significant momentum as an approach to bridging the gap between research and primary-care practice by increasing the relevance of research for those who must act on its findings. This has prompted researchers to better understand how CBPR functions to achieve these benefits. Several studies have identified ‘trust’ as a key mechanism to achieve sustainable partnerships, which themselves constitute social networks. Although existing literature discuss trust and CBPR, or trust and social networks, preliminary searches reveal that none link all three concepts of trust, CBPR and social networks. Thus, we present our scoping review protocol to systematically review and synthesize how trust is conceptualised, operationalised, and measured in CBPR and social networks. Objective: To determine how the literature conceptualises, operationalises, and measures trust within the context of CBPR and social networks. Design: This review follows guidelines set out by Levac et al, which in turn follow the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley. We begin by exploring several electronic databases including Scopus, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and PsychINFO. A search strategy was agreed upon by the team in conjunction with a research librarian. Two independent reviewers screened the articles by title and abstract, then by full-text based on pre-determined exclusion/inclusion criteria. A third reviewer arbitrated discrepancies regarding inclusion/exclusion. Anticipated Results: A narrative summary will be included to complement the tabular results, and we will directly discuss how findings relate to the research question and objectives. In addition, we will also present a thematic analysis of the literature using qualitative description. Findings will therefore be organised into thematic categories such as aims, methodological design, key findings, and gaps in the literature, but also by categories that specifically highlight theoretical and operational linkages such as context, conceptual and operational features, and measurements used. Preliminary results will be presented in November. Conclusions: By reviewing how trust is conceptualised, operationalised and measured within CBPR and social networks, findings will inform specific new research questions aimed at understanding and sustaining primary health care research partnerships.