ArticleBMC medical ethics2017
Experiences of community members and researchers on community engagement in an Ecohealth project in South Africa and Zimbabwe.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public engagement during a typhoid conjugate vaccine trial in Lalitpur, Nepal- experience, challenges and lessons learnt.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Trial
- An integrated climate-structured personal and ambient air pollution monitoring framework embedded within a pregnancy and postpartum cohort in Sub-Saharan Africa.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Effective community engagement in one health research in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.One health outlook · 2025Review
- Community Engagement and Collaboration between Researchers and Community Stakeholders for Schistosomiasis and Malaria Projects in Ingwavuma, uMkhanyakude District, KwaZulu-Natal.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2024Article
- A qualitative study of stakeholder and researcher perspectives of community engagement practices for HIV vaccine clinical trials in South Africa.Journal of community psychology · 2023Article
- Engaging youth in stakeholder analysis for developing community-based digital innovations for mental health of young people in Ingwavuma community, in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Managing community engagement in research in Uganda: insights from practices in HIV/AIDS research.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- The unreachable doorbells of South Texas: community engagement in colonias on the US-Mexico border for mosquito control.BMC public health · 2022Article
- 'Working relationships' across difference - a realist review of community engagement with malaria research.Wellcome open research · 2022Review
- Barriers and facilitators of Patient-Public Engagement for health system improvement in Sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic scoping review.Health policy OPEN · 2021Article
- Patient-public engagement strategies for health system improvement in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic scoping review.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Effective engagement and involvement with community stakeholders in the co-production of global health research.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- International, Transdisciplinary, and Ecohealth Action for Sustainable Agriculture in Asia.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Community-structures that facilitate engagement in health research: Ifakara Health Research Institute-Bagamoyo case study.AAS open research · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCommunity engagement (CE) models have provided much needed guidance for researchers to conceptualise and design engagement strategies for research projects. Most of the published strategies, however, still show very limited contribution of the community to the engagement process. One way of achieving this is to document experiences of community members in the CE processes during project implementation. The aim of our study was to explore the experiences of two research naïve communities, regarding a CE strategy collaboratively developed by researchers and study communities in a multicountry study.
methodsThe study was carried out in two research naïve communities; Gwanda, Zimbabwe and uMkhanyakude, South Africa. The multicentre study was a community based participatory ecohealth multicentre study. A qualitative case study approach was used to explore the CE strategy. Data was collected through Focus Group Discussions, Key Informant Interviews and Direct Observations. Data presented in this paper was collected at three stages of the community engagement process; soon after community entry, soon after sensitisation and during study implementation. Data was analysed through thematic analysis.
resultsThe communities generally had positive experiences of the CE process. They felt that the continuous solicitation of their advice and preferences enabled them to significantly contribute to shaping the engagement process. Communities also perceived the CE process as having been flexible, and that the researchers had presented an open forum for sharing responsibilities in all decision making processes of the engagement process.
conclusionsThis study has demonstrated that research naïve communities can significantly contribute to research processes if they are adequately engaged. The study also showed that if researchers put in maximum effort to demystify the research process, communities become empowered and participate as partners in research.
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.