Skip to main content
BMJ Open logoLink to BMJ Open
. 2018 Jan 24;8(1):e019653. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019653

Best practices for community-engaged participatory research with Pacific Islander communities in the USA and USAPI: protocol for a scoping review

Pearl Anna McElfish 1,2, Britni L Ayers 1, Rachel S Purvis 1, Christopher R Long 1,2, Ka’imi Sinclair 3, Monica Esquivel 4, Susan C Steelman 5
PMCID: PMC5786128  PMID: 29371285

Abstract

Introduction

Community-based participatory research is a partnership approach to research that seeks to equally involve community members, organisational representatives and academic partners throughout the research process in a coequal and mutually beneficial partnership. To date, no published article has synthesised the best practices for community-based participatory research practices with Pacific Islanders.

Methods and analysis

The reviewers will examine studies’ titles, abstracts and full text, comparing eligibility to address discrepancies. For each eligible study, data extraction will be executed by two reviewers and one confirmation coder, comparing extracted data to address any discrepancies. Eligible data will be synthesised and reported in a narrative review assessing coverage and gaps in existing literature related to community-based participatory research with Pacific Islanders.

Discussion and dissemination

The purpose of this review is to identify best practices used when conducting community-based participatory research with Pacific Islanders; it will also extrapolate where the gaps are in the existing literature. This will be the first scoping review on community-based participatory research with Pacific Islanders. To facilitate dissemination, the results of this scoping review will be submitted for publication to a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and shared with community-based participatory research stakeholders.

Keywords: community-based participatory research, Pacific Islanders, scoping review, community-engaged


Strengths and limitations of this study.

  • This is the first scoping review to address the literature on community-based participatory research with Pacific Islanders.

  • The review will provide a synthesis of existing studies, it will be useful to community-based participatory partnerships with Pacific Islanders, and other collectivist cultures.

  • This scoping review is focused on assessment of the coverage and gaps in the existing literature, so quality assessment of individual studies will not be a primary emphasis.

Introduction

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an approach to research that seeks to equally involve community members, organisational representatives and academic partners throughout the research process in a coequal and mutually beneficial partnership.1–5 CBPR is not a specific research method but rather a realignment to research that seeks to foster an environment of shared power. This approach is in contrast to traditional research ontological positions wherein the academics are the experts conducting research with little input from the community being studied. The essential components of CBPR include: equitably including a specific community in all phases of research; building capacity within a community to drive the focus of the research that is of interest to community stakeholders; and implementing research that results in tangible action and directly improves the community’s well-being.5 6 CBPR has demonstrated efficacy in building alliances to conduct research with disenfranchised communities.1 Engaged research is referred to by other terms including action research, CBPR and patient-centred research; the term CBPR will be used throughout this protocol.

Background

Pacific Islanders are the second fastest growing population in the USA, and grew 40% between 2000 and 2010.7–9 In addition to the continental USA and Hawaii, many Pacific Islanders reside in the US Affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPI). The USAPI includes three US territories: American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam, and three independent countries in free association with the USA: the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the Republic of Palau. Pacific Islanders are under-represented in health research, and much of the available research aggregates data from Pacific Islanders and Asian Americans, obscuring the disparities between and within these two heterogeneous populations.10–14 While data aggregation has limited the amount of available data, existing research reveals profound health disparities among Pacific Islanders compared with the general US population.15–39 These disparities include higher rates of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity and cancer.40–44 While national data about life expectancy are not available for Pacific Islanders due to aggregation,45–47 individual state and US territory data document life expectancy for Pacific Islanders as 68.3 years,48compared with the life expectancies of 78 years for non-Hispanic Whites and 79 years for the total US population.47

Pacific Islanders’ health disparities can be attributed to many factors, including a history that has been marked by trauma, exploitation and exclusion. Between 1946 and 1958, the US military detonated 67 fission and thermonuclear devices in the USAPI region, which were equivalent in payload to 7200 Hiroshima-sized bombs.49–52 These nuclear tests caused acute radiation exposure and subsequent illness, and contaminated the soil, ocean and fresh water resources of the USAPI region of the Marshall Islands resulting in food insecurity and serious long-term health effects.50 52–59 After nuclear testing, the USA began Project 4.1 in which Islanders who were exposed to nuclear fallout were interned in a camp in order to study the effects of radiation on humans.60–63 The research was conducted without the informed consent of the Pacific Islanders and without translation of the study information into the native language.52 This historical trauma has contributed to deep apprehension and distrust of western medicine and research.64–69 Historical trauma perpetuates ethical challenges that must be addressed in order to conduct research with Pacific Islanders.70 71

One way to address the effects of historical trauma on Pacific Islander communities’ perceptions of research is through CBPR.70 71 CBPR shares power and builds trust between academic researchers and the community.72 73 There is evidence for the effectiveness of using CBPR to engage minority, immigrant and migrant populations in research to reduce health disparities.74–79 In addition, there is evidence for the effectiveness of using CBPR to reduce health disparities in populations that have experienced historical trauma.80 To date, no published article has synthesised the best practices for CBPR practices with Pacific Islanders. This leaves an important gap in the literature as researchers seek to address the profound health disparities in the rapidly growing Pacific Islander population in the USA.

Objectives

The aim of this scoping review is to examine the best practices for conducting CBPR with Pacific Islanders. Information from the review can be used to guide CBPR research focused on addressing the health disparities among Pacific Islanders. The review will respond to the following question: What are the effective best practices identified by previous CBPR researchers for conducting community-engaged research with Pacific Islanders in the USA and USAPI? Best practices are defined as the methods identified as most effective (ie, successful) by CBPR researchers across multiple studies as outlined by Israel et al.81

Methods

The scoping review protocol was designed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement.82 83

Eligibility criteria

Studies will be selected according to the following criteria (table 1):

Table 1.

Study eligibility criteria

Participant population CBPR studies conducted with Pacific Islanders in the USA or USAPI of any sex or age. Studies that aggregate Pacific Islander and Asian American data will be excluded. Study conducted with Pacific Islanders outside the USA or USAPI will not be included.
Study type All types of studies focused on mental and/or physical health
Outcomes CBPR challenges and best practices
Context Articles that self-identify as using a CBPR approach (or other engaged research term such as action research or patient-centered research)
Study methods All types of studies (eg, randomised controlled trials, mixed methods, cross-sectional, descriptive, qualitative, case studies, and so on)

CBPR, community-based participatory research; USAPI, US Affiliated Pacific Islands.

Studies will be limited to research conducted with participants residing in the USA and USAPI. Studies published between January 2000 and December 2017 in peer-reviewed journals will be included in the review. Only those studies that focus solely on Pacific Islanders will be included. Pacific Islander subgroups include (but are not limited to): Chamorro, Chuukese, Maori, Marshallese, Native Hawaiian, Samoan and Tongan. Studies that include Asian Americans aggregated with Pacific Islanders will not be included. For the purposes of establishing study eligibility, CBPR will be defined as an approach to research that seeks to equally involve community stakeholders and academic partners in the research process in a mutually beneficial partnership.6 Studies that self-identify as CBPR or a related term will be included.

Information sources

The following biomedical databases will be searched for articles meeting the eligibility criteria and focused on English language items with 2000–2017 publication dates. These databases include: MEDLINE (OVID), MEDLINE In Process & Daily Updates (OVID), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (OVID), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature-CINAHL Complete (EBSCO), Health Policy Reference Center (EBSCO), PsychINFO (EBSCO), SocINDEX (EBSCO), Science Citation Index, and Social Sciences Citation Index (both via Web of Science). The search of All EBM Reviews (OVID) will include: ACP Journal Club, Cochrane Database of Scoping Reviews, Databases of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database. The WHO’s Global Health Library will also be searched for international items. Three researchers will review references for inclusion.

Search strategy

The search strategy will be developed by medical librarian coauthor SCS, in consultation with coauthors PAM, BLA, RSP and CRL. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) will be used and explored where appropriate. To obtain a comprehensive set of results, MeSH terminology will be combined with advanced textword searching techniques including truncation and adjacency searching. MeSH headings chosen to make up the base strategy include: exp Oceanic Ancestory Group/AND Community-Based Participatory Research. MeSH and other controlled vocabulary headings will be combined with extensive strings with synonymous terms for each main concept. Pacific Islander terms include: (‘pacific islander’ or ‘native hawaiian’ or Hawaii or ‘ni’ihau’ or niihau or ‘kaua’i’ or kauai or ‘o’ahu’ or oahu or ‘moloka’i’ or molokai or ‘lana’i’ or lanai or ‘kaho’olawe’ or kahoolawe or maui).mp. or (‘austral islands’ or australasia or ‘caroline islands’ or carolinian or chamorro or chuuk or chuukese or ‘cook islands’ or ‘easter island’ or fiji or fijian or ‘futuna island’ or guam or guamanian or ‘i-kiribati’ or kiribati or kosrae or kosraean or ‘mariana islander’ or ‘mariana islands’ or ‘marshall islands’ or marshallese or melanesia or melanesian or micronesia or micronesian or ‘new caledonia’ or niue or ‘ni-vanuatu’ or ‘pacific islander’ or ‘pacific islands’ or palau or palauan or ‘papua new guinea’ or ‘papua new guinean’ or ‘phoenix islands’ or ‘pitcairn islands’ or pohnpei or pohnpeian or polynesia or polynesian or ‘rapa nui’ or saipan or saipanese or ‘american samoa’ or samoa or samoan). Similar synonymous terminology searching will be combined multiple ways to reach the CBPR concept. Controlled vocabulary headings, search strings and the overall strategy will be adapted as needed for other vendor platforms specific to the database used. These adapted strategies and terms may be requested from the corresponding author (PAM). The search terms and strategy to be used from MEDLINE (via OVID) are presented in online supplementary appendix 1.

Supplementary file 1

bmjopen-2017-019653supp001.pdf (198.3KB, pdf)

Data management

Search results will be exported, stored and shared among coauthors using Endnote (V.6.0.1) a bibiographic reference management tool. Duplicate records will be removed from search results by using manual oversight to ensure accurate duplicate removal. The final, unique set of records will be uploaded to Rayyan, a free online tool that allows for easy screening of systematic/scoping review results. As necessary, records will be exported to Excel 2013.

Study selection process

The title and abstract of manuscripts will be reviewed to determine whether the study meets all the eligibility criteria. If the title and abstract of any manuscript do not provide enough information to confirm eligibility, the full article will be reviewed by two researchers to determine if it meets the inclusion criteria. If it is still unclear if the manuscript is eligible, a third reviewer will review the manuscript and a final decision will be made. In the event that multiple publications of a single eligible study are identified, both publications will be included. However, when tabulating quantitative results care will be taken to avoid double-counting single studies.

Data extraction process

Data extraction from each eligible study will be performed by two researchers independently. Then, they will compare the results of the extraction process. Discrepancies in extracted data will be discussed and resolved between the researchers; a third reviewer will be consulted if necessary. If data extraction for an eligible study cannot be completed due to inadequate description of the study in an article’s full text, researchers will contact the publication’s corresponding author via email (up to three attempts) to acquire the missing information. If there are multiple publications of a single eligible study, data will be extracted from the multiple publications. In these cases, extracted data will be evaluated across publications for any inconsistencies. If inconsistencies are identified, researchers will attempt to resolve inconsistencies through discussion or by contacting the publications’ corresponding author via email (up to three attempts). Before data extraction begins, researchers will pilot the extraction spreadsheet on a small sample of eligible studies and adjust the extraction spreadsheet or extraction procedures as necessary.

Data items

The following data will be extracted from each eligible article (table 2):

Table 2.

Data to be extracted

Participant population
  • Race/ethnicity

  • Subgroup of Pacific Islanders

  • Geographical location

  • Sex

  • Age group

Study design
  • Randomised controlled trial

  • Case study

  • Others

Study method(s)
  • Qualitative

  • Quantitative

  • Mixed methods

  • Others

Study setting
  • Churches

  • Clinical setting

  • School systems

  • Community setting

  • Others

Best practices
  • Best practices related to CBPR design, implementation setting, individuals involved and implementation process (eg, recruitment, data collection, retention, dissemination)

Publication details
  • Authors

  • Article title

  • Journal title

  • Year of publication

  • Volume number

  • Issue number

  • Page numbers

  • Funding source

  • Was a community author identified?

CBPR, community-based participatory research.

Because this scoping review’s focus is to assess the coverage and gaps in the literature about CBPR best practices with Pacific Islanders, quality assessment of individual eligible studies will not be a primary focus of the data extraction process.

Data synthesis

Data synthesis will include producing quantitative summaries of extracted data that include frequencies and percentages for many of the extracted data fields. For the Best Practices Field, the researchers, trained in qualitative methods, will begin by coding each segment of data using an inductive coding process to generate a list of emerging best practices. Then researchers will organise emergent codes into a code book that will be used to code each data segment. This process will help organise the data for focused thematic coding and allow the researchers to create salient summaries of best practices.84 85 These summaries will be used to present the convergent and divergent themes within the studies. Additionally, these summaries will allow us to identify gaps in the existing literature.

Discussion

The purpose of this scoping review is to identify best practices used when conducting CBPR with Pacific Islanders; it will also extrapolate where the gaps are in the existing literature. This will be the first scoping review on CBPR with Pacific Islanders. The article will expand the available knowledge on CBPR methods which have shown success in reducing health disparities in African American, Hispanic/Latino and other minority groups.74–80 For this reason, it will be useful to CBPR partnerships with Pacific Islanders who are seeking to address the profound health disparities in the rapidly growing Pacific Islander population. The outcome of this article can serve as a guide for researchers and community members seeking to address health disparities in diverse Pacific Islander communities. For example, those seeking to address a wide variety of health conditions from Hansen’s disease to obesity can use the cumulative best practices in the scoping review to guide their CBPR methods including engagement, recruitment, data collection, retention and dissemination.

Dissemination

To facilitate dissemination, the results of this scoping review will be submitted for publication to a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and shared with CBPR stakeholders.

Supplementary Material

Reviewer comments
Author's manuscript

Footnotes

Contributors: PAM, BLA, RSP, CRL, KS and ME designed the protocol, and SCS developed the search strategy in consultation with PAM, BLA and RSP. PAM, BLA and RSP drafted the protocol, and SCS, CRL and KS revised the protocol. All authors approved the current version of the protocol.

Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests: None declared.

Patient consent: Not required.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

References

  • 1. Vaughn LM, Jacquez F, Lindquist-Grantz R, et al. . Immigrants as research partners: a review of immigrants in community-based participatory research (CBPR). J Immigr Minor Health 2017;19:1457–68. 10.1007/s10903-016-0474-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Townsend CK, Dillard A, Hosoda KK, et al. . Community-based participatory research integrates behavioral and biological research to achieve health equity for Native Hawaiians. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2015;13:4–10. 10.3390/ijerph13010004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. National Institutes of Health. Community-Based Participatory Research Program. 2017. https://www.nimhd.nih.gov/programs/extramural/community-based-participatory.html
  • 4. Panapasa S, Jackson J, Caldwell C, et al. . Community-based participatory research approach to evidence-based research: lessons from the Pacific Islander American Health Study. Prog Community Health Partnersh 2012;6:53–8. 10.1353/cpr.2012.0013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Israel BA, Coombe CM, Cheezum RR, et al. . Community-based participatory research: a capacity-building approach for policy advocacy aimed at eliminating health disparities. Am J Public Health 2010;100:2094–102. 10.2105/AJPH.2009.170506 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, et al. . Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health 1998;19:173–202. 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Grieco E. The Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander population: Census 2000 brief. 2001. http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-14.pdf
  • 8. Bureau USC. 2010 Census Shows More than Half of Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders Report Multiple Races. 2010.
  • 9. Hixson L, Hepler B, Kim M. The Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Population: 2010. 2012. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-12.pdf
  • 10. Working Group of Applied Research Center and National Council of Asian Pacific Americans. Best practices: researching Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders. http://ncapaonline.org/BestPracticesAANHPI.pdf (Accessed 12 September 2013).
  • 11. Ro MJ, Yee AK. Out of the shadows: Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders. Am J Public Health 2010;100:776–8. 10.2105/AJPH.2010.192229 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Srinivasan S, Guillermo T. Toward improved health: disaggregating Asian American and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander data. Am J Public Health 2000;90:1731–4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Nguyen AB, Chawla N, Noone AM, et al. . Disaggregated data and beyond: future queries in cancer control research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014;23:2266–72. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0387 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Ahmad F, Weller C. Reading between the data the incomplete story of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders. 2014.
  • 15. Moy KL, Sallis JF, David KJ. Health indicators of Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders in the United States. J Community Health 2010;35:81–92. 10.1007/s10900-009-9194-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Look M, Trask-Batti M, Mau M, et al. . Assessment and Priorities for Health & Well-being in Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Peoples. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Mau M. Health and health care of Native Hawaiian & other Pacific Islander older adults. Stanford, CA: Stanford School of Medicine, 2010:1–38. [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC - NHOPI - Native Hawaiian - other - Pacific Islander - populations - racial - ethnic - minorities - minority health. 2015. http://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/populations/REMP/nhopi.html (accessed 14 May 2015).
  • 19. Asian American’s Advancing Justice. Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders in the United States, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Asian & Pacific Islander Health Forum. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Health Disparities, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Braun KL, Kim BJ, Ka’opua LS, et al. . Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Elders: what Gerontologists should know. Gerontologist 2015;55:912–9. 10.1093/geront/gnu072 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Evaluation IfHMa. GBD profile: Federated States of Micronesia. 2010. http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/country_profiles/GBD/ihme_gbd_country_report_federated_states_of_micronesia.pdf
  • 23. Panapasa S, Jackson J, Caldwell C, et al. . Pacific Islander health study report: preliminary findings. 2012.
  • 24. United Nations Population Fund. Pacific Island countries: population and development profiles. 2014. http://countryoffice.unfpa.org/pacific/drive/web__140414_UNFPAPopulationandDevelopmentProfiles-PacificSub-RegionExtendedv1LRv2.pdf
  • 25. Economic Policy PaSO, Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the SPC Statistics for Development Programme. 2011. Republic of the Marshall Islands 2011 Census report. Noumea, New Caledonia: 978-982-00-0564-8. [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Moy KL, Sallis JF, Trinidad DR, et al. . Health behaviors of native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander adults in California. Asia Pac J Public Health 2012;24:961–9. 10.1177/1010539511408068 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Aitaoto N, Ichiho HM. Assessing the health care system of services for non-communicable diseases in the US-affiliated Pacific Islands: a Pacific regional perspective. Hawaii J Med Public Health 2013;72(5 Suppl 1):106–14. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Palafox N. Health consequences of the pacific U.S. nuclear weapons testing program in the Marshall Islands: inequity in protection, policy, regulation, presidents cancer panel. Rev Environ Health 2010;1:81–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Palafox NA, Riklon S, Alik W, et al. . Health consequences and health systems response to the Pacific U.S. nuclear weapons testing program. Pac Health Dialog 2007;14:170–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Palafox NY S. The health predicament of the U.S.-associated Pacific Islands: what role for primary health care? Asian Am Pac Isl J Health 1997;5:49–56. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Pobutsky A, Krupitsky D, Yamada S. Micronesian migrant health issues in Hawaii: Part 2: An assessment of health, language and key social determinants of health. Calif J Health Promot 2009;7:32–55. [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Yamada S, Pobutsky A. Micronesian migrant health issues in Hawaii: Part 1: background, home island data, and clinical evidence. Calif J Health Promot 2009;7:16–31. [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. United States affiliated Pacific Islands. 2011 - TB . 2011. http://www.cdc.gov/tb/statistics/reports/2011/pdf/pacificislands.pdf
  • 34. Blackwell D, Lucas H, Clarke T. Summary health statistics for US adults: national health interview survey, 2012. 10: Vital Health Stat, 2014. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. PreventionCfDCa. Summary Health Statistics for U.S. Adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2011: Vital and Health Statistics, 2012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Schiller J, Lucas J, Ward B, et al. . Summary Health Statistics for U. S. Adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2010: National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Health Statistics, 2012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Pleis J, Ward B, Lucas J. Summary Health Statistics for US Adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2009. 10, 2010. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_249.pdf. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Pleis J, Ward B. Summary health statistics for U.S. adults: national health interview survey, 2008. 10: Vital Health Stat, 2009. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Pleis J, Lucas J. Summary health statistics for U.S. adults: national health interview survey, 2007. 10: Vital Health Statistics, 2009. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_240.pdf [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Tung W-C. Diabetes Among Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders. Home Health Care Manag Pract 2012;24:309–11. 10.1177/1084822312454002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Mau MK, Sinclair K, Saito EP, et al. . Cardiometabolic health disparities in native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders. Epidemiol Rev 2009;31:113–29. 10.1093/ajerev/mxp004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Okihiro M, Harrigan R. An overview of obesity and diabetes in the diverse populations of the Pacific. Ethn Dis 2005;15(4 Suppl 5):S5–71. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Buenconsejo-Lum L, Navasca D, Jeong Y, et al. . Cancer in the U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands 2007–2011. Honolulu, HI: PacificRegional Central Cancer Registry, Cancer Council of the Pacific Islands andJohn A. Burns School of Medicine, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 44. US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Minority Health. Profile: Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. 2015. http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=3&lvlid=65 (Accessed 15 June 2015).
  • 45. National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2011: with special feature on socioeconomic status and health. Hyattsville, MD, 2012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2013: with special feature on prescription drugs. Hyattsville, MD, 2014. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Arias E. United States life tables, 2001. Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics; 2004. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Taylor R, Lewis ND, Levy S. Societies in transition: mortality patterns in Pacific Island populations. Int J Epidemiol 1989;18:634–46. 10.1093/ije/18.3.634 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Cooke S. In Mortal Hands: A Cautionary History of the Nuclear Age. New York, USA: Bloomsbury, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Nj. P. Health transitions, fast and nasty: exposure to nuclear radiation. Pacific Health Dialog 2002;9:275–82. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Guyer RL. Radioactivity and rights: clashes at Bikini Atoll. Am J Public Health 2001;91:1371–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Barker H. Bravo for the Marshallese: regaining control in a post-nuclear, the case of Marshallese post-colonial world. 2nd: Cengage Learning, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Lessard ET, Miltenberger RP, Cohn SH, et al. . Protracted exposure to fallout: the Rongelap and Utirik experience. Health Phys 1984;46:511–27. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Robison WL, Bogen KT, Conrado CL. An updated dose assessment for resettlement options at Bikini Atoll--a U.S. nuclear test site. Health Phys 1997;73:100–14. 10.1097/00004032-199707000-00008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Bogen KT, Conrado CL, Robison WL. Uncertainty and variability in updated estimates of potential dose and risk at a U.S. nuclear test site--Bikini Atoll. Health Phys 1997;73:115–26. 10.1097/00004032-199707000-00009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Gilbert ES, Land CE, Simon SL. Health effects from fallout. Health Phys 2002;82:726–35. 10.1097/00004032-200205000-00017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Kroon E, Reddy R, Gunawardane K, et al. . Cancer in the republic of the Marshall Islands. Pac Health Dialog 2004;11:70–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics NCI. Estimation of the baseline number of cancers among Marshallese and the number of cancers attributable to exposure to fallout from nuclear weapons testing conducted in the Marshall Islands. 2004. http://dceg.cancer.gov/RMIdocs/9-28Response_appendix.pdf (accessed 26 Jun 2005).
  • 59. Gittelsohn J, Haberle H, Vastine AE, et al. . Macro- and microlevel processes affect food choice and nutritional status in the republic of the Marshall Islands. J Nutr 2003;133:310S-313S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Martin EJ, Rowland RH. Castle Series, 1951: United States Department of Energy, 1982. DNA6035F. [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Adams W, Heotis P, Scott W. Medical status of Marshallese accidentally exposed to 1954 bravo fallout radiation: January 1985 through December 1987. Upton, NY: Brookhaven National Laboratory, 1989. BNL-52192 UC-408. [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Cohn SH, Rinehart RW, Gong JK, et al. . Nature and extent of internal radioactive contamination of human beings, plants, and animals exposed to fallout. Bethesda, MD and San Francisco, CA: Naval Medical Research Institute and Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, 1955. WT-036. [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Sondhaus CA, Bond VP. Physical factors and dosimetry in the Marshall Island radiation exposures. Ft. Belvoir, VA: Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, 1955. [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Wergowske G, Blanchette PL. Health and health care of elders from Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander backgrounds. 2001. http://web.stanford.edu/group/ethnoger/nativehawaiian.html
  • 65. McElfish P. University of Arkansas for medical sciences-northwest focus groups with Marshallese community, March 2014. Springdale, AR: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences-Northwest, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 66. McElfish P. UAMS-NW marshallese focus groups. Springdale, AR: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences-Northwest, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 67. McElfish P. University of Arkansas for medical sciences-northwest focus groups with Marshallese, December 2013. Springdale, AR: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences-Northwest, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 68. McElfish P. Unpublished summary of interviews with Marshallese stakeholders from June 2012 through October 2013. Springdale, AR and Fayetteville, AR: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences-Northwest, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 69. McElfish P. Unpublished preliminary planning interviews with local Marshallese and Marshallese healthcare providers from August 2012 through November 2013. Springdale, AR and Fayetteville, AR: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences-Northwest, 2012-2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Wallerstein N. Power between evaluator and community: research relationships within New Mexico’s healthier communities. Soc Sci Med 1999;49:39–53. 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00073-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Minkler M. Ethical challenges for the "outside" researcher in community-based participatory research. Health Educ Behav 2004;31:684–97. 10.1177/1090198104269566 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Wallerstein NB, Duran B. Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities. Health Promot Pract 2006;7:312–23. 10.1177/1524839906289376 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Minkler M, Wallerstein N. Community-based participartory research for health: from process to outcomes. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Cacari-Stone L, Wallerstein N, Garcia AP, et al. . The promise of community-based participatory research for health equity: a conceptual model for bridging evidence with policy. Am J Public Health 2014;104:1615–23. 10.2105/AJPH.2014.301961 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Minkler M. Linking science and policy through community-based participatory research to study and address health disparities. Am J Public Health 2010;100(Suppl 1):S81–S87. 10.2105/AJPH.2009.165720 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Rhodes SD, Yee LJ, Hergenrather KC. A community-based rapid assessment of HIV behavioural risk disparities within a large sample of gay men in southeastern USA: a comparison of African American, Latino and white men. AIDS Care 2006;18:1018–24. 10.1080/09540120600568731 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Wallerstein N, Duran B. Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: the intersection of science and practice to improve health equity. Am J Public Health 2010;100(Suppl 1):S40–S46. 10.2105/AJPH.2009.184036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Halladay JR, Donahue KE, Hinderliter AL, et al. . The heart healthy lenoir project--an intervention to reduce disparities in hypertension control: study protocol. BMC Health Serv Res 2013;13:441 10.1186/1472-6963-13-441 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Patzer RE, Gander J, Sauls L, et al. . The RaDIANT community study protocol: community-based participatory research for reducing disparities in access to kidney transplantation. BMC Nephrol 2014;15:171 10.1186/1471-2369-15-171 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Rasmus SM. Indigenizing CBPR: evaluation of a community-based and participatory research process implementation of the Elluam Tungiinun (towards wellness) program in Alaska. Am J Community Psychol 2014;54(1-2):170–9. 10.1007/s10464-014-9653-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Israel BA, Eng E, Schulz AJ, et al. . Methods for community-based participatory research for health. 2nd Edn: Jossey-Bass, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. . Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015;4:1 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, et al. . Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 2015;349:g7647 10.1136/bmj.g7647 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Charmaz K. ’Discovering' chronic illness: using grounded theory. Soc Sci Med 1990;30:1161–72. 10.1016/0277-9536(90)90256-R [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Charmaz K. Teaching theory construction with initial grounded theory tools: a reflection on lessons and learning. Qual Health Res 2015;25:1610–22. 10.1177/1049732315613982 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary file 1

bmjopen-2017-019653supp001.pdf (198.3KB, pdf)

Reviewer comments
Author's manuscript

Articles from BMJ Open are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES