Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25973834›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2015

Community-Based Review of Research Across Diverse Community Contexts: Key Characteristics, Critical Issues, and Future Directions.

Nancy Shore, Angela Ford, Eric Wat, Missy Brayboy, Mei-Ling Isaacs, Alice Park, Hal Strelnick, Sarena D Seifer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Communities, universal health coverage and primary health care.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2020
    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

8 authors.

Nancy ShoreNancy Shore is with the School of Social Work, University of New England, Portland, ME. Angela Ford was with the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA. Eric Wat is with Special Service for Groups, Los Angeles, CA. Missy Brayboy was with the North Carolina Commission of Indian Affairs, Raleigh. Mei-Ling Isaacs was with Papa Ola Lokahi, Honolulu, HI. Alice Park was with and Sarena D. Seifer is with Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, Seattle, WA. Hal Strelnick is with the Department of Family and Social Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY.
Angela Ford
Eric Wat
Missy Brayboy
Mei-Ling Isaacs
Alice Park
Hal Strelnick
Sarena D Seifer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing number of community-based organizations and community-academic partnerships are implementing processes to determine whether and how health research is conducted in their communities. These community-based research review processes (CRPs) can provide individual and community-level ethics protections, enhance the cultural relevance of study designs and competence of researchers, build community and academic research capacity, and shape research agendas that benefit diverse communities. To better understand how they are organized and function, representatives of 9 CRPs from across the United States convened in 2012 for a working meeting. In this article, we articulated and analyzed the models presented, offered guidance to communities that seek to establish a CRP, and made recommendations for future research, practice, and policy.

Indexed as

Community-Institutional RelationsAdvisory CommitteesBiomedical ResearchForecastingHealth PolicyHealth PrioritiesHumansResearchResearch Support as TopicResidence CharacteristicsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID25973834
PMCPMC4463398

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.