ArticleHealth promotion practice2017
Evaluating Community-Academic Partnerships of the South Carolina Healthy Brain Research Network.
Article in Health promotion practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation and lessons learned from the dissemination and implementation science scholars program in the national cancer prevention and control research network.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Development of a Clinical-Academic-Community Collaboration to Improve Health Literacy.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Community-academic partnerships have a long history of support from public health researchers and practitioners as an effective way to advance research and solutions to issues that are of concern to communities and their citizens. Data on the development and evaluation of partnerships focused on healthy aging and cognitive health were limited. The purpose of this article is to examine how community partners view the benefits and barriers of a community-academic partner group established to support activities of the South Carolina Healthy Brain Research Network (SC-HBRN). The SC-HBRN is part of the national Healthy Brain Research Network, a thematic research network funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). It is focused on improving the scientific and research translation agenda on cognitive health and healthy aging. Semistructured interviews, conducted at end of Year 2 of the 5-year partnership, were used to collect data from partners of the SC-HBRN. Reported benefits of the partnership were information sharing and networking, reaching a broader audience, and humanizing research. When asked to describe what they perceived as barriers to the collaborative, partners described some lack of clarity regarding goals of the network and opportunities to contribute to the partnership. Study results can guide and strengthen other public health-focused partnerships.
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.