Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26365589›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2015

A Community-Academic Partnered Grant Writing Series to Build Infrastructure for Partnered Research.

Keyonna M King, Yvette-Janine Pardo, Keith C Norris, Maria Diaz-Romero, D'Ann Morris, Stefanie D Vassar, Arleen F Brown

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Keyonna M KingDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Yvette-Janine PardoAssist Management and Consulting, LLC, Pasadena, California, USA.
Keith C NorrisDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Maria Diaz-RomeroCharles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, California, USA.
D'Ann MorrisLos Angeles Urban League, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Stefanie D VassarDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Arleen F BrownDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

UCLA Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000124 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI DUBINETT, STEVEN M. · 2012 to 2015
$57.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000124NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR000124
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Grant writing is an essential skill necessary to secure financial support for community programs and research projects. Increasingly, funding opportunities for translational biomedical research require studies to engage community partners, patients, or other stakeholders in the research process to address their concerns. However, there is little evidence on strategies to prepare teams of academic and community partners to collaborate on grants. This paper presents the description and formative evaluation of a two-part community-academic partnered grant writing series designed to help community organizations and academic institutions build infrastructure for collaborative research projects using a partnered approach. The first phase of the series was a half-day workshop on grant readiness, which was open to all interested community partners. The second phase, open only to community-academic teams that met eligibility criteria, was a 12-week session that covered partnered grant writing for foundation grants and National Institutes of Health grants. Participants in both phases reported an increase in knowledge and self-efficacy for writing partnered proposals. At 1-year follow-up, participants in Phase 2 had secured approximately $1.87 million in funding. This community-academic partnered grant writing series helped participants obtain proposal development skills and helped community-academic teams successfully compete for funding.

Indexed as

AuthorshipCommunity-Institutional RelationsResearch PersonnelResearch Support as TopicWritingBiomedical ResearchCapacity BuildingCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchCooperative BehaviorCurriculumEducation, ProfessionalHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationPeer Review, ResearchProgram DevelopmentProgram Evaluationevidence based medicineoutcomes researchstructuretranslational research

Identifiers

PMID26365589
PMCPMC5300023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.