Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27422896›Full record

ArticleHealth education research2016

Participation levels in 25 Community-based participatory research projects.

C R Spears Johnson, A E Kraemer Diaz, T A Arcury

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health education research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Fallacy of Community-Based Research.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Community-Engaged Research in Early Home Visiting: A Scoping Review of Peer-Reviewed Literature.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Aligning Community-Engaged Research to Context.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Research Apprenticeship and Its Potential as a Distinct Model of Peer Research Practice.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2018
    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

3 authors.

C R Spears JohnsonDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.
A E Kraemer DiazDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.
T A ArcuryDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA tarcury@wakehealth.edu.

Funding

Scientific Integrity in Community-Based Participatory ResearchR21ES020967 · NIEHS · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ARCURY, THOMAS A. · 2011 to 2012
$407k
NIEHS NIH HHS R21 ES020967
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This analysis describes the nature of community participation in National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded community-based participatory research (CBPR) projects, and explores the scientific and social implications of variation in community participation. We conducted in-depth interviews in 2012 with professional and community researchers from 25 CBPR projects in the Southeast US. Interview topics focused on participants' experiences with the nature and conduct of their CBPR project. Projects were rated on community participation in 13 components of research. Projects varied substantially in community participation. Some projects had community participation in only two to three components; others had participation in every component. Some professional researchers were deliberate in their inclusion of community participation in all aspects of research, others had community participation in some aspects, and others were mainly concerned that community members had the opportunity to participate in the study. Findings suggest a need for a standardized rubric for community-based research that facilitates delineation of approaches and procedures that are effective and efficient. Little actual community participation may also result in negative social impacts for communities.

Indexed as

Research DesignSocial ChangeCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchHumansInterviews as TopicSoutheastern United States

Identifiers

PMID27422896
PMCPMC5025561

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.