Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26469656›Full record

SynthesisAmerican journal of public health2015

A Systematic Review of Community Engagement in the US Environmental Protection Agency's Extramural Research Solicitations: Implications for Research Funders.

Tina Yuen, Alice N Park, Sarena D Seifer, Devon Payne-Sturges

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A Scoping Review of Capacity-Building Efforts to Address Environmental Justice Concerns.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Toward Health Equity: A National Study of Promising Practices in Community-Based Participatory Research.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

4 authors.

Tina YuenAt the time of the study, Tina Yuen was with the National Center for Environmental Research, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Alice N. Park and Sarena D. Seifer were with Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, Seattle, WA. Devon Payne-Sturges is with the Maryland Institute for Applied Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park.
Alice N ParkAt the time of the study, Tina Yuen was with the National Center for Environmental Research, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Alice N. Park and Sarena D. Seifer were with Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, Seattle, WA. Devon Payne-Sturges is with the Maryland Institute for Applied Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park.
Sarena D SeiferAt the time of the study, Tina Yuen was with the National Center for Environmental Research, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Alice N. Park and Sarena D. Seifer were with Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, Seattle, WA. Devon Payne-Sturges is with the Maryland Institute for Applied Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park.
Devon Payne-SturgesAt the time of the study, Tina Yuen was with the National Center for Environmental Research, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Alice N. Park and Sarena D. Seifer were with Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, Seattle, WA. Devon Payne-Sturges is with the Maryland Institute for Applied Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe systematically reviewed the Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Research's (NCER's) requests for applications (RFAs) and identified strategies that NCER and other funders can take to bolster community engagement.

methodsWe queried NCER's publically available online archive of funding opportunities from fiscal years 1997 to 2013. From an initial list of 211 RFAs that met our inclusion criteria, 33 discussed or incorporated elements of community engagement. We examined these RFAs along 6 dimensions and the degree of alignments between them.

resultsWe found changes over time in the number of RFAs that included community engagement, variations in how community engagement is defined and expected, inconsistencies between application requirements and peer review criteria, and the inclusion of mechanisms supporting community engagement in research.

conclusionsThe results inform a systematic approach to developing RFAs that support community engagement in research.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationResearchUnited States Environmental Protection AgencyCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchHumansPeer ReviewResearch DesignResearch Support as TopicUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26469656
PMCPMC4638242

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.