| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
A Qualitative Study of a Nutrition Working GroupDepartment of Nutrition and Food Sciences at the University of Rhode Island in Kingston, Rhode Island
Health Promotion Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences at the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland
Department of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts
Public Health Nutrition, Department of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts
Department of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts
Oregon Research Institute in Eugene, Oregon
School of Public Health at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan
University of Rochester in Rochester, New York
Division of Health Promotion and Sports Medicine at the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, Oregon
Illinois Institute of Technology, Institute of Psychology, in Chicago, Illinois
Rossingdale, Massachusetts
Rush Nutrition and Wellness Center in Chicago, Illinois
Division of Health Promotion and Sports Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, Oregon
Departments of Nutrition and of Society, Human Development, and Health at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts The Behavioral Change Consortium (BCC) Nutrition Workgroup (NWG) is a multidisciplinary collaboration of representatives from BCC sites and federal agencies. Its mission is to improve measurement of dietary variables. This article presents findings from a qualitative study of perceived effectiveness of the workgroup collaboration. Twelve in-depth interviews were conducted and examined for common themes using the constant comparison method. Themes contributing to perceived effectiveness included: funding and additional resources; invested, committed, and collegial members; strong leadership, clearly articulated goals, and regular communication. Influences seen as reducing effectiveness were: distance, disparate nature of the studies, limited time, and problems associated with starting collaboration after the primary studies had begun data collection. NWG members felt that the workgroup would continue to be successful; however, there were concerns about responsibility for writing and authorship of manuscripts and the need for continued funding to ensure full participation and productivity.
Key Words: working group qualitative research collaboration transdisciplinary teams
This version was published on July
1, 2007 Health Promotion Practice, Vol. 8, No. 3,
299-306 (2007) This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||


