Research emphasizing community input and participation, here termed “community-focused research,” is increasing in the health sciences literature. Maintaining a community focus may shape methodological choices around data collection, yet little is known about what types of data (primary, secondary; quantitative or qualitative) community-focused researchers use.

Information on data sources and data collection methods were abstracted from the final products from five cohorts of community-focused research teams who participated in Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Interdisciplinary Research Leaders program between 2016 and 2023.

Among 53 total teams with a final product, the vast majority used primary data either alone (74%) or in combination with secondary data (21%). Of the 50 teams who conducted primary data collection, 38% collected only qualitative data, 18% collected only quantitative data, and 44% collected both quantitative and qualitative data.

Primary data collection and qualitative methods were far more common in these community-focused research projects than in the general health sciences literature. The reasons that so many teams chose to collect primary, qualitative data are not known but may reflect a lack of existing data on communities of interest, prioritization of data collection methods that allow for greater community involvement, or research on novel topics for which there are not yet validated quantitative measurement tools. Identifying reasons for these data collection choices may identify opportunities for improving efficiency (e.g., making existing data easier to access) and/or targeting training (e.g., in qualitative data collection) to support community-focused research.