X Close

Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care Blog

Home

Menu

Archive for the 'Networks' Category

Working as a Community Researcher on the Brent Integrated Care Partnership

By Eleanor Mason, on 4 October 2023

A photograph of a town garden in Brent with plants, a park and a grassy area.

A blog from Community Researcher Sean Chou in his own words. 

‘It’s important to get feelers out there and really get to know the community.’

At the beginning, I felt nervous about being a community researcher. It was a role that I was keen to get stuck into – having studied Anthropology as an undergraduate, I felt equipped with the curiosity and listening skills needed to glean insights from residents. But it was also one that I really didn’t want to get wrong. What if I said something offensive? What if I came off so keen to chat that it came across as awkward?

All of these doubts were soothed by the words from my research supervisor, Tamsin. I had regular weekly catch up meetings, as well as one-to-ones, where I had a safe space to share feedback on research and how I felt during research. It felt humanising to acknowledge that research has a person-centred approach, that the researcher themselves could have fears or internal doubts to reckon with.

But it was Tamsin’s personal touch that lit a flame in me. Tamsin had a keen interest in sustainability and building resilient communities with environmental solutions, and I was impressed to see how an interest in helping the local community in Brent could be knitted together with one’s own vision for what a better society could look like.

For me, that was about the community helping to lead change. Our research project looked at health inequalities in Brent, as well as how residents used community assets to tackle these inequalities. These went beyond just the ‘obvious’ physical assets – libraries, parks, civic buildings, to include the ones the communities valued themselves. Partnerships, mutual aid groups, classes, all of these are relationships that tie us together and ultimately make up who we are as holistic, social beings, rather than atomised, individual units.

This is especially the case [for our?] health. I attended community events organised by Brent Health Matters (BHM) which aimed to promote positive health outcomes, healthy living as well as register and signpost attendees to health and medical services such as GP registration.

I was able to see how attendees were tied together – or sometimes not, and sometimes made vulnerable, by their health: a mother with two children attended an event, not speaking English, but helped by my fellow researcher to translate her symptoms so the GP could make the right diagnosis. A woman who attended a floristry class saying that she attended because this helped with her mental health and make friends; if she wasn’t here today, she didn’t know what she would be doing. A night shift worker opening up to a BHM health worker about diabetes in her family, before breaking down crying about her family in Bangladesh. As I watched her be taken away by the health worker to talk somewhere more private, away from prying eyes, I was reminded of how health is a sensitive, emotionally charged experience for people. When we’re told by someone we love that we’re unhealthy, it often comes off as judgement – ‘You’re not doing enough to get healthy, you’re slacking’. But our physical health is often entangled with work, family, caring responsibilities that make it difficult to recentre our lives around living healthily.

But it also reminded me that some groups are more susceptible to poor health outcomes than others – those with low incomes, women, community groups, those from migrant backgrounds. BHM targeted these groups by bringing events to them. Community centres, places of worship, football pitches, food halls – all of these were places used to bring health services and awareness to communities, and ultimately bring communities together.

I was fortunate enough to be able to connect with the Chinese community. As a British Taiwanese person myself, I felt well placed to strike up rapport with those active in the community working across many different charities and local venues. I had conversations in Mandarin Chinese and bonded with members of the community over shared cultural festivals and cuisine. But I could also make sure that research was done for and by us, not just about us – in interactions and interviews, I made sure to emphasise the importance of residents’ views and ensure that research was led by residents’ interests from the ground up.

I am proud then to call myself a community researcher. From my experience, I have been able to connect my personal background with relationships that structure people’s wider access to healthcare. It remains vitally important that such work, centred on lived experiences, recognising others, listening to in-depth stories, continues through participant observation and interview research methods. Throughout my time as a community researcher, I’ve learned how to approach residents with empathy and curiosity, learned to tap into their views with interviews and produce data that represents the multi-dimensional, complex lived experiences residents have. Such data underpins ultimately why it’s so important to conduct community research, to see the people we study as holistic beings made up of different commitments and relationships, but ultimately brought together to be with others and lead a good life.

Want to find out more about the experience of our Community Researchers? Take a look at this zine by Sarah Al-Halfi.

Taking the me out of social media

By guest blogger, on 9 October 2019

Emma Walker, second year BBSRC-ESRC funded Centre for Doctoral Training in Biosocial Research PhD student at University College London’s Institute for Epidemiology and Health Care, describes how getting involved with research on social media helped her to reflect on her own usage. 

It’s 00.23 and I should be in bed. I’ve got lots on tomorrow but I’ve spent the last 45 minutes scrolling. Scrolling through the profiles of Instagram “life style coaches”, yogis, models; each collection of photos perfectly curated to appeal to my desire for millennial aesthetic.

Everything feels so much better than anything I have. And actually, in the world of Instagram, I know that everything is much better than what I have. Number of followers or number of likes on each post has conveniently quantified this for me.

The next evening, as part of my public health PhD work, I’m reading Professor Yvonne Kelly’s paper laying out the effects of social media use on the mental health of girls. I diligently make notes “.. greater social media use related to online harassment, poor sleep, low self-esteem and poor body image .. ” “..girls affected more than boys..” and pause periodically to check my phone.

All my friends are at the pub having a great time, another friend just put up a post where she looks amazing, it already has 50 likes. I get to the methods section of the paper “how many times in the last 2 weeks have you felt miserable or unhappy; found it hard to think properly or concentrate; felt lonely; thought you could never be as good as other kids…”.

Then the penny drops. Why do I think I’m immune? I’m like the lifelong smoker who’s confused by their cancer diagnosis: “I never thought it would happen to me.” The idea starts to filter in: I don’t need this in my life. In fact, I need this to not be a part of my life.

The next day I deactivate my Instagram account. That day I meet a friend for coffee in a hipster café and don’t take a picture of my coffee. That night I get to sleep by 11pm. The next day I work more productively than I’ve worked in weeks.

An opportunity to get involved comes up: the National Literacy Trust are really interested in Yvonne’s work and are keen to put together an event for young people. A great group of undergraduates and I devise a series of activities to find out what young people think about the research.

The first section would involve 4 zones at the front of the Renaissance Learning centre room for Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree and Strongly Disagree we put a series of statements on the board and ask the pupils to move to a zone and explain why. We include statements on a range of topics including cyber bullying, sleep deprivation, self-esteem and body image and parents and social media.

On the day, the 50 enthusiastic 11-14 year olds from 3 schools across London jostle about, keen to share their opinions and to hear one another’s. I’m amazed at the diversity of ideas, overall willingness to get involved and the mental health literacy of many of the students.

Some responses are predictable; the boys happy to appear less concerned about body image, many keen to state in front of their teachers that social media does not in any way disrupt their studies. Some are surprising; only a handful of pupils had been on social media before arriving at the event that day (a significantly lower proportion than the adults running it!) Other responses are hard to read; were the gaggle of girls laughing at the very idea of social media posts making you feel left out, honest or desperate to seem not to care?

A clear feeling was the young people’s frustration at their parents use of phones and social media. Many expressed irritation at the rules their parents have established – no phones at the table, in bedrooms, after 8pm – that they, themselves constantly break.

One boy described having to ask the same question 3 times before his dad will look up from his phone. The idea that our event should be run for parents was cheered.

Next we presented them with the evidence base for the possible impact of social media and mental health then asked them to make public health campaign like posters with top tips that could go up in their schools. We were presented with a beautiful collection of posters with thoughtful advice, carefully put together information, clever slogans and eye catching drawings. Audio recordings from the day gave further insights from the young who readily offered tips and advice for younger children.

Overall, I think the event was a success. My main impression was that these young people are actually very well equipped to protect themselves from the potential mental health impact of social media. That in fact it may be people in their 20s, who have grown up in the full glare of social media and its pressures, who are at the greatest risk.

It was a real privilege being able to discuss this topic with young people and the message that stood out the most from them is the opportunity parents have to make a difference by practicing what they preach.  Chances are they’ll benefit from switching off!

As for me, it’s now been 6 months since I deleted Instagram and whilst it hasn’t been plain sailing – I have got this itch for the buzz of an influx of likes –  for the time being I’m happy and I would wholeheartedly recommend it!

Launching the MARCH Network: Social, Cultural and Community Assets for Mental Health

By guest blogger, on 5 September 2018

Mental health is the single largest cause of disability in the UK, and it is estimated that almost a quarter of the country’s population are affected by mental health issues each year. So in September 2018, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) announced £8 million of funding to bring researchers, charities and other organisations together to address important mental health research questions. One of the grants for £1.25m has been awarded to Dr Daisy Fancourt, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care at UCL. Here she tells us about her new programme.

I am delighted to be launching the new MARCH Network. While many approaches to mental health focus on a ‘deficit’ approach, identifying and fixing ‘problems’, this new national network takes an ‘asset-based approach’, which gives prominence to the resources (or ‘assets’) that exist within our communities. This network proposes that these Assets for Resilient Communities lie at the centre of Mental Health (M-ARC-H), and can enhance public mental health and wellbeing, help to prevent mental illness and support those living with mental health conditions.

Specifically, we’re focusing on social, cultural and community assets which include the arts, culture, heritage, libraries, parks, community gardens, allotments, care farms, leisure centres, volunteer associations, social clubs and community groups. There are over 1 million of these assets in the UK and over the past decade there has been a surge in cross-disciplinary research into the impact of these assets on mental health. For example, social psychology research has illuminated the impact of these assets on social capital. Sociology and epidemiology research has demonstrated how these assets provide social support and engagement. Psychobiology and behavioural psychology research has identified specific mechanisms underpinning the effects of these activities. And anthropological and historical research has highlighted challenges in maintaining a sense of community for individuals.

However, despite this progress, research in this area is still in its infancy compared to research into other areas of mental health, and there are several challenges facing researchers. For example, much of the work into community assets is happening in silos: silos based on assets (such as research on arts and mental health happening separately from research on volunteering and mental health); and silos based on disciplines. Additionally, there is a recognised social gradient across community participation but precisely what barriers to access are and how they can be overcome remains poorly understood.

So the MARCH network aims to tackle these challenges through two core workstreams. Workstream 1 focuses on cross-disciplinary research and challenges. We will be exploring two core questions:

  1. What evidence is there, from a cross-disciplinary perspective, for how and why community assets impact on public health and wellbeing and the lives of those living with mental illness, and where are the gaps for future research?
  2. How can we use a cross-disciplinary approach to address methodological challenges in researching the impact of community assets on mental health and to provide meaningful data to different stakeholders and users?

Workstream 2 focuses on two research questions relating to engagement with community assets:

  1. Who amongst the UK population, demographically and geographically, currently engages with community assets and specifically how does participation vary dependent on mental health?
  2. What are the current barriers and enablers to engagement at an individual, organisational and policy level and how can we develop innovative approaches to enhance engagement, especially amongst those who are most vulnerable?

To answer these questions, MARCH will:

  • Bring together international leaders in mental health and community assets research and facilitate the development of meaningful partnerships with policy makers, commissioners and third sector organisations.
  • Run a series of planned ‘core’ activities (including roundtables, consultations and focus groups) to address these identified research challenges leading to a series of major new evidence and methodology reports.
  • Distribute £280,000 of ‘plus’ funds for new research projects and activities for identified research gaps.
  • Host a rich portfolio of impact and engagement activities to translate the research findings into policy and practice, and encourage greater public engagement with community assets.
  • Design and deliver a training and support programme to develop cross-disciplinary skills and expertise amongst the next generation of researchers.

This network is extremely topical right now: it fits in with major developments in mental health such as the roll-out of social prescribing through NHS England and sits well alongside biomedical approaches to mental health. So as we imagine the future of mental health, a strong role for community assets appears inevitable. But we need to ensure that we have robust research underpinning this so that practice does not overtake research. Overall the MARCH network has the aim of transforming our understanding of how community assets can be mobilised to encourage more resilient individuals and communities and moving this area of work from the sidelines of mental health research to the mainstream.

If you are interested in receiving updates or becoming involved, you can register with the network at www.surveymonkey.com/r/M-ARC-H

Investigator team:

  • Dr Daisy Fancourt (Principal Investigator, UCL)
  • Prof Kamaldeep Bhui (Queen Mary University of London)
  • Prof Helen Chatterjee (UCL)
  • Prof Paul Crawford (University of Nottingham)
  • Prof Geoffrey Crossick (School of Advanced Study, University of London)
  • Prof Tia DeNora (University of Exeter)
  • Prof Jane South (Leeds Beckett University).

Partners:

Action for Children, Action for Happiness, Age UK, Arts Council England, Arts Council of Wales, Beyond Skin, Coin Street Community Builders, Community Catalysts Ltd, Crafts Council, Creative Scotland, Culture Health and Wellbeing Alliance, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Greenwich Leisure Ltd, Historic England, Libraries Unlimited, Live Music Now, Local Government Association, Mental Health Foundation, MIND, MindOut, Mosaic Youth, Museums Association, National Trust, Natural England, NCVO, NESTA, NHS Health Scotland, People Dancing, Public Health England, Public Health Wales, Rastafari Movement UK, Royal Horticultural Society, Royal Society for Public Health, Sing Up Foundation, Social Farms and Gardens, Social Prescribing Network, The Children’s Society, The Conservation Volunteers, The Eden Project, The Heritage Lottery Fund, The Listening Place, The Reading Agency, The Wildlife Trusts (UK), Think Local Act Personal, Voluntary Arts, What Works Centre for Wellbeing, Wonder Foundation, Youth Music, Youth Music Theatre UK, UK Theatre.

Dr Daisy Fancourt is a Wellcome Research Fellow in the Department of Behavioural Science and Health at UCL specialising in psychoneuroimmunology and social epidemiology. Her research focuses on the relationships between cultural and community participation and health outcomes across the lifespan.

https://iris.ucl.ac.uk/iris/browse/profile?upi=DFANC73