ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2016
Implementing Qualitative Data Management Plans to Ensure Ethical Standards in Multi-Partner Centers.
Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Data Governance in Health Research: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- A data management plan for the NESHIE observational study.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Strategies for culturally safe research with Native American communities: an integrative review.Contemporary nurse · 2022Review
- Data Management in Health-Related Research Involving Indigenous Communities in the United States and Canada: A Scoping Review.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Examining Data Repository Guidelines for Qualitative Data Sharing.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thorough data management is crucial for the protection of people who participate in research and the ability for researchers to share results with the public. The impact of inadequate adherence to data management is particularly evident in small field sites and among vulnerable populations partoicipating in Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR). CBPR presents exciting opportunities for multimedia and multi-sectoral dissemination of research results and policy change, especially concerning the impact of research on health equity for underrepresented populations. In this article, we discuss how we defined data boundaries and protections to adhere to ethical standards while also prioritizing data dissemination while using CBPR with American Indians in Arizona. Although complex partnerships can introduce additional risks to data oversight, data management practices can also increase opportunities for wide-reaching dissemination. We hope to contribute to the literature on data sharing in multi-partnership projects to bolster the impact of dissemination while also protecting participants and populations who chose to collaborate in research and policy practices.
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.