Curricular Engagement Report: Academic Year 2016

The purpose of this report is to provide readers with information about the frequency of community engagement through course-based experiences at IUPUI

Faculty experiences with community engaged research: Challenges, successes, and recommendations for the future.

Methodology for an institutional research study that explores the lived experiences of faculty, who to some extent, work with the community - its people, organizations, assets, etc. - when conducting research and creative activity

Demonstrating the Impact of Community Engagement: Realistic and Doable Strategies

Presentation at the Coalition of Urban and Metropolitan Universities conference in Denver, CO (October, 2017)Most campuses are eager to answer questions like “How are students, faculty, and staff on campus working to address civic issues and public problems?”, “To what extent is our engagement making a difference?”, “How can we better support community engagement?” Discover how to track, monitor, assess, and evaluate community-engaged activities, which include curricular, co-curricular, or project-based activities that are done in partnership with the community, in order to tell a more comprehensive story of engagement. Whether you’re interested in community outcomes, student outcomes, partnership assessment, or faculty/staff engagement, campuses confront an array of challenges when trying to combine and align these questions into a comprehensive assessment plan. This session will give participants tools, strategies, and information to design, initiate and/or enhance a systematic mechanism for monitoring and assessment of community-engaged activities

Demonstrating the Impact of Community Engagement: Realistic and Doable Strategies

Presentation at the Coalition of Urban and Metropolitan Universities conference in Denver, CO (October, 2017)Most campuses are eager to answer questions like “How are students, faculty, and staff on campus working to address civic issues and public problems?”, “To what extent is our engagement making a difference?”, “How can we better support community engagement?” Discover how to track, monitor, assess, and evaluate community-engaged activities, which include curricular, co-curricular, or project-based activities that are done in partnership with the community, in order to tell a more comprehensive story of engagement. Whether you’re interested in community outcomes, student outcomes, partnership assessment, or faculty/staff engagement, campuses confront an array of challenges when trying to combine and align these questions into a comprehensive assessment plan. This session will give participants tools, strategies, and information to design, initiate and/or enhance a systematic mechanism for monitoring and assessment of community-engaged activities

Exploring the Lives, Communities, and Social Circles of Individuals with Intellectual/Developmental Disabilities through Photo Voice

Historically, research on vulnerable or marginalized groups, such as persons with intellectual or developmental disabilities (IDD), has focused on studying such populations rather than meaningfully engaging them in the research process. This Indianapolis-based Photovoice study gives voice to individuals with IDD by involving them in community-engaged research and shining a light on the issues that they identified as needing attention in their communities. Nine individuals with IDD volunteered to serve as co-researchers, exploring their lives and communities through photography. Over a period of six weeks, the nine co-researchers took photos of their communities and participated in group discussions to identify common issues. Discussions about the co-researchers’ photographs uncovered important themes regarding social relationships, community participation, and independence that led to action in the form of a letter writing campaign to local and national policymakers and a public art show to display and discuss their photography

Faculty experiences with community engaged research: Challenges, successes, and recommendations for the future.

Methodology for an institutional research study that explores the lived experiences of faculty, who to some extent, work with the community - its people, organizations, assets, etc. - when conducting research and creative activity

Prospective observational cohort study on grading the severity of postoperative complications in global surgery research

Background The Clavien–Dindo classification is perhaps the most widely used approach for reporting postoperative complications in clinical trials. This system classifies complication severity by the treatment provided. However, it is unclear whether the Clavien–Dindo system can be used internationally in studies across differing healthcare systems in high- (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods This was a secondary analysis of the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), a prospective observational cohort study of elective surgery in adults. Data collection occurred over a 7-day period. Severity of complications was graded using Clavien–Dindo and the simpler ISOS grading (mild, moderate or severe, based on guided investigator judgement). Severity grading was compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Data are presented as frequencies and ICC values (with 95 per cent c.i.). The analysis was stratified by income status of the country, comparing HICs with LMICs. Results A total of 44 814 patients were recruited from 474 hospitals in 27 countries (19 HICs and 8 LMICs). Some 7508 patients (16·8 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication, equivalent to 11 664 complications in total. Using the ISOS classification, 5504 of 11 664 complications (47·2 per cent) were graded as mild, 4244 (36·4 per cent) as moderate and 1916 (16·4 per cent) as severe. Using Clavien–Dindo, 6781 of 11 664 complications (58·1 per cent) were graded as I or II, 1740 (14·9 per cent) as III, 2408 (20·6 per cent) as IV and 735 (6·3 per cent) as V. Agreement between classification systems was poor overall (ICC 0·41, 95 per cent c.i. 0·20 to 0·55), and in LMICs (ICC 0·23, 0·05 to 0·38) and HICs (ICC 0·46, 0·25 to 0·59). Conclusion Caution is recommended when using a treatment approach to grade complications in global surgery studies, as this may introduce bias unintentionally