Life Events, Barriers to Care, and Outcomes Among Minority Women Experiencing Depression: A Longitudinal, Mixed-Method Examination.

The long-term course of depression is not well-understood among minority women. We assessed depression trajectory, barriers to depression care, and life difficulties among minority women accessing health and social service programs as part of the Community Partners in Care study. Data include surveys ( N = 339) and interviews ( n = 58) administered at 3-year follow-up with African American and Latina women with improved versus persistent depression.

Engaging Community Networks to Improve Depression Services: A Cluster-Randomized Trial of a Community Engagement and Planning Intervention.

This paper explores the effects of a group-randomized controlled trial, Community Partners in Care (CPIC), on the development of interagency networks for collaborative depression care improvement between a community engagement and planning (CEP) intervention and a resources for services (RS) intervention that provided the same content solely via technical assistance to individual programs. Both interventions consisted of a diverse set of service agencies, including health, mental health, substance abuse treatment, social services, and community-trusted organizations such as churches and parks and recreation centers. Participants in the community councils for the CEP intervention reflected a range of agency leaders, staff, and other stakeholders.

Participatory Technology Development to Enhance Community Resilience.

Objective: To assess the feasibility of a novel, partnered technology development process to co-create mobile health applications (apps) addressing community health priorities, using psychoeducation of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) principles for enhancing resilience as an example.

Design: Stakeholder engagement, workgroups, pilot feasibility study using mixed methods during October 2013 through January 2016 over three phases: 1) defining the vision of the project and increasing technical capacity, 2) co-development and pilot testing of the app, and 3) planning for sustainability.

Setting: An academic-community partnership in South Los Angeles, California.

Whole Person Care in Under-resourced Communities: Stakeholder Priorities at Long-Term Follow-Up in Community Partners in Care.

Objective: Depressed individuals may require help from different agencies to address health and social needs, but how such coordination occurs in under-resourced communities is poorly understood. This study sought to identify priorities of Latino and African American depressed clients, explore whether service providers understand client priorities, and describe how providers address them.

Methods: Between October 2014 and February 2015, we interviewed 104 clients stratified by depression history and 50 representatives of different programs in health and social community agencies who participated in Community Partners in Care, a cluster-randomized trial of coalition-building approaches to delivering depression quality improvement programs.

Growing a Community-Academic Partnership: Lessons Learned in Forming a Qualitative Interview Team for the Community Partners in Care Study.

By engaging, partnering, and building trust with community members, research on vulnerable populations may offer opportunities to improve population health in communities that suffer from health disparities. While the literature on participatory and partnered approaches offers techniques and strategies for forming community-academic partnerships, less information is available about how partnerships can grow and evolve over time. In this article, we describe the expansion of a long-standing partnership that uses principles of community partnered participatory research (CPPR), a variant of community-based participatory research (CBPR).

Maintaining Internal Validity in Community Partnered Participatory Research: Experience from the Community Partners in Care Study.

Objective: With internal validity being a central goal of designed experiments, we seek to elucidate how community partnered participatory research (CPPR) impacts the internal validity of public health comparative-effectiveness research.

Methods: Community Partners in Care (CPIC), a study comparing a community-coalition intervention to direct technical assistance for disseminating depression care to vulnerable populations, is used to illustrate design choices developed with attention to core CPPR principles. The study-design process is reviewed retrospectively and evaluated based on the resulting covariate balance across intervention arms and on broader peer-review assessments.

Community Partners in Care: 6- and 12-month Outcomes of Community Engagement versus Technical Assistance to Implement Depression Collaborative Care among Depressed Older Adults.

Objective: Community Partners in Care, a community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial with depressed clients from 95 Los Angeles health and community programs, examined the added value of a community coalition approach (Community Engagement and Planning [CEP]) versus individual program technical assistance (Resources for Services [RS]) to implement depression collaborative care in underserved communities. This exploratory subanalysis examines 6- and 12-month outcomes among CPIC participants aged >50 years.

Design: Community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial conducted between April 2010 and March 2012.

Comparative Effectiveness of Coalitions Versus Technical Assistance for Depression Quality Improvement in Persons with Multiple Chronic Conditions.

Significance: Prior research suggests that Community Engagement and Planning (CEP) for coalition support compared with Resources for Services (RS) for program technical assistance to implement depression quality improvement programs improves 6- and 12-month client mental-health related quality of life (MHRQL); however, effects for clients with multiple chronic medical conditions (MCC) are unknown.

Objective: To explore effectiveness of CEP vs RS in MCC and non-MCC subgroups.

Design: Secondary analyses of a cluster-randomized trial.

Comparative Effectiveness of Two Models of Depression Services Quality Improvement in Health and Community Sectors.

Objective: The effectiveness of community coalition building and program technical assistance was compared in implementation of collaborative care for depression among health care and community sector clients.

Methods: In under-resourced communities, within 93 programs randomly assigned to coalition building (Community Engagement and Planning) or program technical assistance (Resources for Services) models, 1,018 clients completed surveys at baseline and at six, 12, or 36 months. Regression analysis was used to estimate intervention effects and intervention-by-sector interaction effects on depression, mental health-related quality of life, and community-prioritized outcomes and on services use.

A Community-Partnered, Participatory, Cluster-Randomized Study of Depression Care Quality Improvement: Three-Year Outcomes.

Objective: Community Partners in Care, a community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial with depressed clients from 93 Los Angeles health and community programs, examined the added value of a community coalition approach (Community Engagement and Planning [CEP]) versus individual program technical assistance (Resources for Services [RS]) for implementing depression quality improvement in underserved communities. CEP was more effective than RS in improving mental health-related quality of life, reducing behavioral health hospitalizations, and shifting services toward community-based programs at six months. At 12 months, continued evidence of improvement was found.

Participation in Training for Depression Care Quality Improvement: A Randomized Trial of Community Engagement or Technical Support.

Objective: Community engagement and planning (CEP) could improve dissemination of depression care quality improvement in underresourced communities, but whether its effects on provider training participation differ from those of standard technical assistance, or resources for services (RS), is unknown. This study compared program- and staff-level participation in depression care quality improvement training among programs enrolled in CEP, which trained networks of health care and social-community agencies jointly, and RS, which provided technical support to individual programs.

Methods: Matched programs from health care and social-community service sectors in two communities were randomly assigned to RS or CEP.

Community Partners in Care (CPIC): Video Summary of Rationale, Study Approach / Implementation, and Client 6-month Outcomes.

"Community Partners in Care (CPIC): Video Summary of Rationale, Study Approach / Implementation, and Client 6-month Outcomes" is a 2 minute, 46 second video summarizing the study rationale, study approach, and the 6-month outcomes. The video was produced by four agencies: Healthy African American Families II, a health advocacy organization in South Los Angeles; Behavioral Health Services, the largest substance/alcohol abuse service provider in LA County; UCLA; and RAND Health; contract filmmakers Eileen Cabiling and Joe Mango handled cinematography, editing, and video support. The individuals appearing in the video are key CPIC community and academic partners.

Community-partnered research conference model: the experience of Community Partners in Care study.

The Problem: Conducting community-partnered research conferences is a powerful yet underutilized approach to translating research into practice and improving result dissemination and intervention sustainability strategies. Nonetheless, detailed descriptions of conference features and ways to use them in empirical research are rare.

Purpose: We describe how community-partnered conferences may be integrated into research projects by using an example of Community Partners in Care (CPIC), a large, cluster-randomized, controlled, trial (RCT) that uses community-partnered participatory research (CPPR) principles.