Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24228677›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2014

Evidence, power, and policy change in community-based participatory research.

Nicholas Freudenberg, Emma Tsui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Community-based Participatory Research: A Practical Guide for Radiologists.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Planning theory- and evidence-based behavior change interventions: a conceptual review of the intervention mapping protocol.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2017
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Health literacy: strengthening agency or changing structures?International journal of public health · 2016
    Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Nicholas FreudenbergNicholas Freudenberg is with the City University of New York School of Public Health and Hunter College, New York, NY. Emma Tsui is with the City University of New York School of Public Health and Lehman College, New York, NY.
Emma Tsui

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meaningful improvements in health require modifying the social determinants of health. As policies are often underlying causes of the living conditions that shape health, policy change becomes a health goal. This focus on policy has led to increasing interest in expanding the focus of community-based participatory research (CBPR) to change not only communities but also policies. To best realize this potential, the relationship between evidence and power in policy change must be more fully explored. Effective action to promote policies that improve population health requires a deeper understanding of the roles of scientific evidence and political power in bringing about policy change; the appropriate scales for policy change, from community to global; and the participatory processes that best acknowledge the interplay between power and evidence.

Indexed as

Community-Based Participatory ResearchPublic HealthPublic PolicyEvidence-Based PracticeHumansSocial Change

Identifiers

PMID24228677
PMCPMC3910045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.