In community-based research, the process does not end with data collection and analysis. A vital but often overlooked step is validation, where findings are shared with participants for feedback. This helps check researcher interpretation, supports relationship building and empowers communities to ensure their voices are heard.
While validation is common in medical and public health research, it often takes the form of formal presentations followed by a question-and-answer session. This format can be inaccessible to community members, especially those who need translation or whose first language is not English.
As part of the Community Engagement for Pandemic Preparedness (CEPP) project, which drew on experiences from the Covid-19 pandemic to explore how community engagement in Ealing (UK), Marseille (France) and Cleveland (US) can enhance pandemic preparedness, we held a validation workshop with participants in Ealing. Our goal was to make this as engaging and accessible as possible, providing an opportunity to share our results, invite feedback and foster dialogue in an inclusive and participatory setting.
Representing finds through fictional stories
The workshop brought together residents, community organisations and local authority representatives to reflect on findings from ethnographic, focus group and key informant research.
We presented two fictional stories from the Covid-19 pandemic designed to be representative of our overall findings. The first story was from an Ealing resident’s perspective and the other from a small community organisation. The resident’s story highlighted issues faced by multigenerational, overcrowded households, including unclear guidance, language barriers, digital exclusion and misinformation. This story seemed to deeply resonate with the group, one participant said,
“The bits in the story about digital exclusion were on point. There was so much of that in our communities.”
The small organisation’s story illustrated challenges such as short-term funding, undervalued relationship-based work and exclusion from planning. Attendees noted how the story captured the struggles of small organisations and the ongoing inequalities exposed by the pandemic.
After small group discussions, we gathered initial feedback and reflections. We deliberately did not have any set questions; our aim was to keep the space as open as possible and allow participants to focus on what was important to them. In the second half of the workshop, participants focused on scenario planning, drawing on their lived experience and aspirations to imagine a better response to any future pandemics.
Four lessons for the future
Validation deepens insight
While participants felt we had captured many important themes, they also highlighted areas we had missed. One participant reflected, “I think what is missing is the impact of the pandemic on mental health, especially young people. They couldn’t go to school or socialise.” Although our overall findings did focus on mental health, we had not explored the pandemic’s consequences on young people’s mental health and emotional social development. This highlights the need to engage young people in research directly.
Others pointed to untapped potential in communities: “There’s so much untapped skill already in our communities, this needs to be recognised and used a lot better.”
Their reflections helped us see the data through a sharper, more nuanced lens. They also confirmed themes we had interpreted as common such as issues around council communications, housing, persisting inequalities and the importance of local community organisations.
Stories spark connection: considerations for equitable participation
The storytelling format was successful. It made the research accessible and relatable, encouraging open dialogue across diverse groups. “We really appreciated the stories; it really brought things to life,” one participant shared. The format made the content more engaging, holding attention in a way dry presentations cannot.
This connection however can be impinged by language barriers and depends on who is comfortable to speak. For community members who are not used to being in workshop settings it is essential that they are made to feel at ease. In our workshop we asked a community leader from a local community voluntary organisation known the participants to be present, this leader was not only able to translate for those who did not understand English but was also able to support community members in sharing their insights.
Visualising a better future: Key emergent themes
By inviting participants to co-create future scenarios, we moved beyond critique to collaborative solution-building. Themes like culturally competent health messaging, trust in small community organisations and proactive emergency planning emerged as priorities.
Participants voiced the need for clearer, more inclusive communication: “Messaging, especially from the NHS isn’t always clear. Sometimes it can be confusing or off-putting to the community.”
Others emphasised the importance of sustained engagement: “There needs to be meaningful relationships. We aren’t just target populations.” One participant from the local authority summed it up: “I think as a team we understand that engagement needs to be ongoing and not just something that happens in a crisis.”
In a world of information overload, one participant noted, “Knowing what to believe is hard. Having more trustworthy sources of information is important.”
Validation builds trust
Returning to participants with our findings and putting them at the centre of our research reinforced that their voices matter. As one attendee put it, “It’s great to see all of the findings together and have an opportunity to reflect on them.” The workshop also helped bridge gaps between residents, council staff and health professionals, creating a shared space for empathy and understanding.
Why validation matters
Validation isn’t just a methodological step. It ensures that research reflects the realities of those it aims to serve and that communities are not just studied but empowered to have their voices heard.
As many communities are still recovering from the impact of Covid-19, alongside multiple other complex challenges, this kind of participatory, reflective practice is more important than ever. As one participant put it, “People are tired of talking about the pandemic.” but they’re not tired of being heard.
To read findings from across our project follow the links below:
- Strengthening Community and Community Engagement Infrastructure for Better Pandemic and Emergency Preparedness at the Local Level
- Community Engagement for Public Health in Cleveland, Ohio, United States
- Community Engagement for Public Health in Cleveland, Ohio, United States: Policy Briefing, Brighton: Institute of Development Studies
- Building Trust and Engagement: Vital to Health Emergency Preparedness and Response
