Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21460643›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in psychiatry2011

Ethical issues in mental health research: the case for community engagement.

James M Dubois, Brendolyn Bailey-Burch, Dan Bustillos, Jean Campbell, Linda Cottler, Celia B Fisher, Whitney B Hadley, Jinger G Hoop, Laura Roberts, Erica K Salter and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in psychiatry, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. The triple challenge of recruiting older adults with dementia and high medical acuity in skilled nursing facilities.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2013
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Exchanging words: Engaging the challenges of sharing qualitative research data.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A Web-Based Platform for Educating Researchers About Bioethics and Biobanking.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2016
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. HIV prevention research ethics: an introduction to the special issue.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

James M DuboisGnaegi Center for Healthcare Ethics, Salus 5th floor, Saint Louis University, 3545 Lafayette Avenue, St Louis, MO 63104, USA. duboisjm@slu.edu
Brendolyn Bailey-Burch
Dan Bustillos
Jean Campbell
Linda Cottler
Celia B Fisher
Whitney B Hadley
Jinger G Hoop
Laura Roberts
Erica K Salter
Joan E Sieber
Richard D Stevenson

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences (UL1)UL1RR024992 · NCRR · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2007 to 2011
$45.4M
Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
Best Practices in Mental Health Research Ethics Conference SeriesR13MH079690 · NIMH · SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY · PI DUBOIS, JAMES M · 2007 to 2010
$190k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024992NIMH NIH HHS 1R13MH079690NIMH NIH HHS R13 MH079690
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo describe community-engaged research (CEnR) and how it may improve the quality of a research study while addressing ethical concerns that communities may have with mental health and substance abuse research. This article includes a review of the literature as well as recommendations from an expert panel convened with funding from the US National Institute of Mental Health. RECENT

findingsCEnR represents a broad spectrum of practices, including representation on institutional ethics committees, attitude research with individuals from the study population, engaging community advisory boards, forming research partnerships with community organizations, and including community members as co-investigators. SUMMARY: CEnR poses some challenges; for example, it requires funding and training for researchers and community members. However, it offers many benefits to researchers and communities, and some form of CEnR is appropriate and feasible in nearly every study involving human participants.

Indexed as

Ethics, ResearchMental DisordersBiomedical ResearchEthics Committees, ResearchHumansMental HealthResidence Characteristics

Identifiers

PMID21460643
PMCPMC3528105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.