Collaboration between providers and researchers can be key to doing women’s HIV prevention that is holistic, gender sensitive, and responsive to communities. This report centers on providers’ and evaluators’ experiences in developing and implementing a project promoting “healthy relationships” with low-income women from different ethnicities at an urban American Indian clinic. During planning, decisions on the health problems to be targeted, division of labor, program goals, resource allocation, evaluation design, and outcome measures were jointly made. Other factors were the input of participants and the influence of American Indian values at the clinic. The implementation process was fully collaborative. There are implications for creating conditions for successful collaborations in health education.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Amaro H: Love, sex and power: Considering women’s realities in HIV prevention. American Psychologist50: 6-6, 1995.
2.
2. Weeks MR, Schensul JJ, Williams SS, Singer M, Grier M: AIDS prevention for African-American and Latina women: Building culturally and gender-appropriate intervention. AIDS Education and Prevention7(3): 251-263, 1995.
3.
3. Cochran SD, Mays VM: Women and HIV infection: Issues in prevention and behavior change, in Mays V, Albee G, Schneider S (eds.): Primary Prevention of AIDS: Psychological Approaches. Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1989.
4.
4. Maclure R: The challenge of participatory research and its implications for funding agencies. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy10(3): 1-21, 1990.
5.
5. Littrell DW: An introduction to action research in community development. Research in Rural Sociology and Development2: 187-195, 1985.
6.
6. Smith D: The Everyday World as Problematic. Boston, Northeastern University Press, 1985.
7.
7. Blankenship K: Approaches and dilemmas in community-based health research and action. Paper presented to Society for the Study of Social Problems, New York, August 1996.
8.
8. Rogers TF: Improving the fit between social science and health care practice: Suggested next steps for the researcher. Social Science and Medicine25(6): 689-696, 1987.
9.
9. Goldstein E, Wrubel J, Faigeles B, DeCarlo P: Sources of information for HIV prevention program managers: A national survey. AIDS Education and Prevention10(1): 63-74, 1998.
10.
10. Allison KR: Scientific rigor and community participation in health promotion research: Are they compatible?Health Promotion International11(4): 333-340, 1996.
11.
11. Molitor F, Chen M, Jungkeit M, Poindexter B: Epidemiology of AIDS and HIV Among Racial/Ethnic Groups in California. Sacramento, California Department of Health Services Office of AIDS, 1997.
12.
12. Klein D, Zahnd E: Perspectives of pregnant substance-using women: Findings from the California Perinatal Needs Assessment. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs29(1): 55-66, 1997.
13.
13. Zahnd E, Klein D: Needs of pregnant and parenting American Indian women at risk for problem alcohol or drug use. American Indian Culture and Research Journal21(3): 119-144, 1997.
14.
14. Elcock M, Araba-Owoyele L, Klein D, Zahnd E: HIV Risk behaviors among pregnant and parenting American Indian women. Unpublished paper.
15.
15. Sanchez TR, Plawecki JA, Plawecki HM: The delivery of culturally sensitive health care to Native Americans. Journal of Holistic Nursing14(4): 295-307, 1996.
16.
16. Carovano K: More than mothers and whores: Redefining the AIDS prevention needs of women. International Journal of Health Sciences21(1): 131-142, 1991.
17.
17. Worth D: Sexual decision-making and AIDS: Why condom promotion among vulnerable women is likely to fail. Studies of Family Planning20(6): 297-307, 1989.
18.
18. Dolcini MM, Catania JA, Coates TJ, Stall R, Hudes ES, Gagnon JH, Pollack LM: Demographic characteristics of heterosexuals with multiple partners: The National AIDS Behavioral Surveys. Family Planning Perspectives25: 208-214, 1993.
19.
19. Soskolne V, Aral SO, Magder LS, Reed DS, Bowen GS: Condom use with regular and casual partners among women attending family planning clinics. Family Planning Perspectives23(5): 222-225, 1991.
20.
20. Santiago-Rivera AL, Morse GS, Hunt A, Lickers H: Building a community-based research partnership: Lessons from the Mohawk nation of Akwesasne. Journal of Community Psychology26(2): 163-174, 1998.
21.
21. John R: The uninvited researcher in Indian Country: Problems of process and product conducting research among Native Americans. Mid-American Review of Sociology14(1/2): 113-133, 1990.
22.
22. Trimble JE: The sojourner in the American Indian community: Methodological issues and concerns. Journal of Social Issues33(4): 159-174, 1977.
23.
23. Wax ML: The ethics of research in American Indian communities. American Indian Quarterly15(4): 431-456, 1991.
24.
24. Gondolf EW, Yllö K, Campbell J: Collaboration between researchers and advocates, in Kantor GK, Jasinski JL (eds.): Out of Darkness: Contemporary Perspectives on Family Violence. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 1995.
