Community-based participatory research (CBPR) answers the call for more patient-centered, community-driven research approaches to address growing health disparities. CBPR is a collaborative research approach that equitably involves community members, researchers, and other stakeholders in the research process and recognizes the unique strengths that each bring. The aim of CBPR is to combine knowledge and action to create positive and lasting social change. With its origins in psychology, sociology, and critical pedagogy, CBPR has become a common research approach in the fields of public health, medicine, and nursing. Although it is well aligned with psychology's ethical principles and research aims, it has not been widely implemented in psychology research. The present article introduces CBPR to a general psychology audience while considering the unique aims of and challenges in conducting psychology research. In this article, we define CBPR principles, differentiate it from a more traditional psychology research approach, retrace its historical roots, provide concrete steps for its implementation, discuss its potential benefits, and explore practical and ethical challenges for its integration into psychology research. Finally, we provide a case study of CBPR in psychology to illustrate its key constructs and implementation. In sum, CBPR is a relevant, important, and promising research framework that may guide the implementation of more effective, culturally appropriate, socially just, and sustainable community-based psychology research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Background: There is a need for clinical tools to identify cultural issues in diagnostic assessment.Aims: To assess the feasibility, acceptability and clinical utility of the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) in routine clinical practice.Method: Mixed-methods evaluation of field trial data from six countries. The CFI was administered to diagnostically diverse psychiatric out-patients during a diagnostic interview. In post-evaluation sessions, patients and clinicians completed debriefing qualitative interviews and Likert-scale questionnaires. The duration of CFI administration and the full diagnostic session were monitored.Results: Mixed-methods data from 318 patients and 75 clinicians found the CFI feasible, acceptable and useful. Clinician feasibility ratings were significantly lower than patient ratings and other clinician-assessed outcomes. After administering one CFI, however, clinician feasibility ratings improved significantly and subsequent interviews required less time.Conclusions: The CFI was included in DSM-5 as a feasible, acceptable and useful cultural assessment tool.

Objectives. Cross-cultural mental health researchers often analyze patient explanatory models of illness to optimize service provision. The Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) is a cross-cultural assessment tool released in May 2013 with DSM-5 to revise shortcomings from the DSM-IV Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF). The CFI field trial took place in 6 countries, 14 sites, and with 321 patients to explore its feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility with patients and clinicians. We sought to analyze if and how CFI feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility were related to patient–clinician communication. Design. We report data from the New York site which enrolled 7 clinicians and 32 patients in 32 patient–clinician dyads. We undertook a data analysis independent of the parent field trial by conducting content analyses of debriefing interviews with all participants (n = 64) based on codebooks derived from frameworks for medical communication and implementation outcomes. Three coders created codebooks, coded independently, established inter-rater coding reliability, and analyzed if the CFI affects medical communication with respect to feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility. Results. Despite racial, ethnical, cultural, and professional differences within our group of patients and clinicians, we found that promoting satisfaction through the interview, eliciting data, eliciting the patient's perspective, and perceiving data at multiple levels were common codes that explained how the CFI affected medical communication. We also found that all but two codes fell under the implementation outcome of clinical utility, two fell under acceptability, and none fell under feasibility. Conclusion. Our study offers new directions for research on how a cultural interview affects patient–clinician communication. Future research can analyze how the CFI and other cultural interviews impact medical communication in clinical settings with subsequent effects on outcomes such as medication adherence, appointment retention, and health condition.

People with serious mental illnesses (SMI) are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease and premature mortality. We used photovoice in two supportive housing agencies to engage consumers with SMI to inform the implementation of health care interventions. Sixteen consumers participated in six weekly sessions in which they took photographs about their health and discussed the meanings of these photographs in individual interviews and group sessions. We identified several implementation themes related to consumers’ preferences. Peer-based approaches were preferred more than clinician-driven models. Participants expressed a desire to learn practical skills through hands-on activities to modify health behaviors. Consumers expressed a desire to increase their physical activity. Participants revealed in their photographs and narratives the important role that communities’ food environments play in shaping eating habits. In this article, we show how photovoice can generate valuable community knowledge to inform the translation of health care interventions in supportive housing agencies.