ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2013
Variation in the interpretation of scientific integrity in community-based participatory health research.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participatory Research for Environmental Justice: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis.Environmental health perspectives · 2021Review
- Using Community-Based Participatory Research to Develop Geospatial Models Toward Improving Community Health for Disadvantaged Hispanic Populations in Charlotte, NC.The journal of primary prevention · 2018Article
- Ethics and Science in the Participatory Era: A Vignette-Based Delphi Study.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2017Article
- Coproduction of Research Questions and Research Evidence in Public Health: The Study to Prevent Teen Drinking Parties.BioMed research international · 2017Article
- Community Engagement and Research Translation in Puerto Rico's Northern Karst Region: The PROTECT Superfund Research Program.New solutions : a journal of environmental and occupational health policy : NS · 2016Article
- On using ethical principles of community-engaged research in translational science.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2016Article
- Participatory Research as One Piece of the Puzzle: A Systematic Review of Consumer Involvement in Design of Technology-Based Youth Mental Health and Well-Being Interventions.JMIR human factors · 2015Article
- Perceptions that influence the maintenance of scientific integrity in community-based participatory research.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2015Article
- From subject to participant: ethics and the evolving role of community in health research.American journal of public health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has become essential in health disparities and environmental justice research; however, the scientific integrity of CBPR projects has become a concern. Some concerns, such as appropriate research training, lack of access to resources and finances, have been discussed as possibly limiting the scientific integrity of a project. Prior to understanding what threatens scientific integrity in CBPR, it is vital to understand what scientific integrity means for the professional and community investigators who are involved in CBPR. This analysis explores the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR among 74 professional and community research team members from of 25 CBPR projects in nine states in the southeastern United States in 2012. It describes the basic definition for scientific integrity and then explores variations in the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR. Variations in the interpretations were associated with team member identity as professional or community investigators. Professional investigators understood scientific integrity in CBPR as either conceptually or logistically flexible, as challenging to balance with community needs, or no different than traditional scientific integrity. Community investigators interpret other factors as important in scientific integrity, such as trust, accountability, and overall benefit to the community. This research demonstrates that the variations in the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR call for a new definition of scientific integrity in CBPR that takes into account the understanding and needs of all investigators.
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.