A mixed-methods feasibility study of an educational intervention to operationalize recommendations for community-academic genomics research partnerships

Background Scientific mistrust contributes to lower participation and underrepresentation of Black Americans in genomics studies limiting understanding of how genomic variation and environmental exposures influence health disparities. Community-engaged research requires rebuilding scientific trust; however, there is a need for practical models that operationalize guidance for researchers without community-engaged research training. Therefore, we developed an educational intervention for genomics researchers initiating partnerships with Black American communities. Our intervention creates a bidirectional teaching environment that allows potential community and academic partners to discuss areas of expertise for each stakeholder, partnership perspectives and needs, while exploring modules related to genomics research and community-academic partnership. We report a novel and structured approach for prospective academic and community partners to mutually orient one another and assess partnership practicability. Methods Ten participants, recruited through established community channels, attended a four-hour workshop containing nine interactive modules about scientific mistrust, research safeguards, community-engaged research, genomics, and research for community-defined goals. We also experimented with humor to enhance engagement and trust. We used mixed-methods, single-arm research design and assessed feasibility through recruitment success and retention. Using inductive rapid thematic analyses, we assessed participant responses to eight workshop prompts. Preliminary quantitative data, used for descriptive purposes due to low sample size, were analyzed from pre- and post-Likert scale surveys assessing associations between the intervention and four domains, including scientific trust. Results All 10 enrolled participants completed the study, meeting a priori criteria of 100% for recruitment and show rate. Engagement was strongest during early workshop modules and declined in later modules. Survey data completeness was limited by missing responses. Survey instrument design limitations were identified for modification in future studies. Participants articulated expectations for partnership that aligned with community-based participatory research principles. Conclusions The intervention is feasible to deliver as a bidirectional educational experience in partnership with a community organization. The strongest implementation refinements needed were workshop duration, module prioritization, and survey instrument design, particularly the trust domain. A community advisory board is co-developing modules and refining the intervention to evaluate in a pilot version of the study with a larger sample.