ArticleProgress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action2013
The development of the Bronx Community Research Review Board: a pilot feasibility project for a model of community consultation.
Article in Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characteristics of research review boards in the context of community-academic settings: A scoping review.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Review
- IRBs and the Protection-Inclusion Dilemma: Finding a Balance.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2023Article
- Aligning clinical research ethics with community-engaged and participatory research in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- A Cross Sectional Survey of Recruitment Practices, Supports, and Perceived Roles for Unaffiliated and Non-scientist Members of IRBs.AJOB empirical bioethics · 2023Article
- Integrating community voices in the research continuum: Perspectives on a consultation service.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- A scoping review to identify and describe the characteristics of theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Research 101: A process for developing local guidelines for ethical research in heavily researched communities.Harm reduction journal · 2019Article
- Convergence Despite Divergence: Views of Academic and Community Stakeholders about the Ethics of Community-Engaged Research.Ethnicity & disease · 2019Article
- Stakeholder-driven, consensus development methods to design an ethical framework and guidelines for engaged research.PloS one · 2018Article
- Community-Based Review of Research Across Diverse Community Contexts: Key Characteristics, Critical Issues, and Future Directions.American journal of public health · 2015Article
- (Epistemic) Injustice and Resistance in Canadian Research Ethics Governance.Ethics & human researchArticle
- Troubling heroes: Reframing the environmental justice contributions of the Flint water crisis.WIREs. WaterArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Bronx Community Research Review Board (BxCRRB) is a community-academic partnership (CAP) between the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and The Bronx Health Link (BHL). Rather than asking clinical investigators to create their own individual process de novo, we have developed an innovative, structural approach to achieve community consultation in research planning, implementation, and dissemination that involves and educates the public about research.
objectivesTo collaboratively develop (1) an independent research review board of volunteer community residents and repre sentatives that tests a model of community consultation, dialogue, and "community-informed consent" by reviewing community-based research proposals; and (2) to increased understanding of and participation in clinical research in the Bronx.
methods(1) Recruiting members from the Health and Human Services committees of community boards, focus groups, and community health events; (2) interviewing and selecting members based on community involvement, experiences, availability, and demographics of the Bronx; (3) training members in bioethics and research methods; and (4) facilitating meetings and discussions between clinical researchers and the BxCRRB for research review and consultation.
resultsThere is substantial interest among Bronx residents in participating in the BxCRRB. The BxCRRB provided feedback to researchers to ensure the protection of participants' rights, to improve research design by promoting increased accountability to the community, and expanded its scope to include earlier stages of the research process.
conclusionThe BxCRRB is a viable model for community consultation in research, but more time for implementation and evolution is needed to improve its review practices and ensure community input at all stages of the research process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.