Community Partner-Led Data Collection Using a Computer-Based Audience Response System: Lessons Learned

Purpose: When compared to other states in the United States, Arkansas health indicators are consistently worse, principally because it is a predominantly rural state. Unfortunately, racial and ethnic minorities living in the state have even poorer health indicators, with the Delta region demonstrating the most marked disparities. Therefore a community-academic research partnership was developed to address these disparities among African-Americans in the Delta. The faith community was targeted specifically because the church is one of the most trusted institutions in rural African-American communities. As part of this effort health assessment surveys were administered in order to identify the key health issue or concern to address. The community-academic team implemented a study involving collection of quantitative data using a computer-based audience response system (ARS). The recruitment and data collection efforts were led by the community partners, both who are pastors residing in the Delta. Thirty health assessment survey sessions were conducted in churches across two rural communities with a total of 461 participants. In an effort to better understand the data collection process (planning, training, and facilitating) and identify lessons learned, the team participated in a self-reflection exercise.

Methods: An external qualitative research consultant conducted two focus groups—one with the academic team members and one with community team members. Eligibility for both groups included attending at least one health assessment using ARS. The consultant was accompanied by a note-taker to capture non-verbal cues and an overall description of the focus group and group dynamics. Each focus group lasted approximately 90-minutes. The sessions were digitally-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The consultant then reviewed, coded and conducted content analysis using Atlas.ti software.

Results: A total of 9 research team members participated in the focus groups. The self-reflection resulted in eight lessons learned themes. These included the following: Overall views of the ARS-the use of it as a data collection tool and a mechanism to engage the community; ARS envisioned and what transpired; what went well – the positive aspects of ARS including participant engagement during the data collection process; challenges – such as adherence to the protocol and unexpected technical difficulties; Recruitment; ARS Training; Ideas for the future, for example ensuring technical support; and Words of wisdom to colleagues.

Conclusion: The lessons learned can help community-academic research partnerships identify the best circumstances to use a computerized audience response system for data collection and key elements to include in the planning, training, and facilitation process. Overall the ARS was viewed as a successful method, and with some minor changes and consideration of its limitations (e.g. inability to capture continuous data) would be recommended as something to continue using in future CBPR projects.