ArticleAmerican journal of public health2013
Ethical considerations for conducting health disparities research in community health centers: a social-ecological perspective.
Article in American journal of public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The HEALthy Brain and Child Development Study (HBCD) experience: Recruiting and retaining diverse families in a longitudinal, multi-method early childhood study.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2024Article
- Review
- A Study of a Culturally and Contextually Situated Multimedia Approach to Recruit a Hard-to-Reach Spanish-Speaking Population for a Randomized Control Trial (RCT).Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2022Article
- Big Data in Context: Addressing the Twin Perils of Data Absenteeism and Chauvinism in the Context of Health Disparities Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Qualitative Study of Knowledge, Perception, and Behavior Related to Hypertension and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Reduction Among Hypertensive African-Americans in Urban Inner City of South Bronx, New York.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2019Article
- Providing monetary and non-monetary goods to research participants: perspectives and practices of researchers and Research Ethics Committees in Zambia.Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2018Article
- Addressing Hearing Health Care Disparities among Older Adults in a US-Mexico Border Community.Frontiers in public health · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Community health centers (CHCs) provide optimal research settings. They serve a high-risk, medically underserved population in the greatest need of intervention. Low socioeconomic status renders this population particularly vulnerable to research misconduct. Traditional principles of research ethics are often applied to participants only. The social-ecological model offers a comprehensive framework for applying these principles across multiple levels (participants, providers, organizations, communities, and policy). Our experience with the Trial Using Motivational Interviewing, Positive Affect and Self-Affirmation in African-Americans with Hypertension, a randomized trial conducted in CHCs, led us to propose a new platform for discussing research ethics; examine the social, community, and political factors surrounding research conducted in CHCs; and recommend how future research should be conducted in such settings.
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.