Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29862298›Full record

SynthesisBioMed research international2018

Searching for the Impact of Participation in Health and Health Research: Challenges and Methods.

Janet Harris, Tina Cook, Lisa Gibbs, John Oetzel, Jon Salsberg, Carolynne Shinn, Jane Springett, Nina Wallerstein, Michael Wright

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Contributors are representative, as long as they agree: How confirmation logic overrides effort to achieve synthesis in applied health research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. What Does It Take for Research to Be Rehabilitation Research?Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2022
    Article
  14. User involvement in the making: Positions and types of knowledge enacted in the interaction between service users and researchers in user panel meetings.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. [Participatory health research: origins and current trends].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

9 authors.

Janet HarrisSchool of Health & Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S14DA, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0754-7223
Tina CookDepartment of Disability and Education, Liverpool Hope University, Hope Park, Liverpool L16 9JD, UK.
Lisa GibbsCentre for Health Equity, University of Melbourne, Level 5, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, VIC 3053, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9702-6896
John OetzelWaikato Management School, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-3188-776X
Jon SalsbergGraduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick V94 T9PX, Ireland.
Carolynne ShinnNew Hampshire Division of Health and Human Services, 105 Pleasant Street, Concord, NH 03301, USA.
Jane SpringettSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, 3-289 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405-87 Ave., Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2C9.
Nina WallersteinCollege of Population Health, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA.
Michael WrightInstitute for Social Health, Catholic University of Applied Sciences Berlin, Kopenicker Allee 39-57, 10318 Berlin, Germany.

Funding

Transdisciplinary Research, Equity and Engagement Center for Advancing Behavioral HealthU54MD004811 · NIMHD · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI CACARI STONE, LISA MARIE · 2017 to 2022
$8.7M
Enhancing CBPR Practice through Provision of Expert Information SkillsR01NR015241 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI WALLERSTEIN, NINA B · 2015 to 2019
$2.7M
Department of Health KMRF-2014-03-003NIMHD NIH HHS U54 MD004811NINR NIH HHS R01 NR015241
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Internationally, the interest in involving patients and the public in designing and delivering health interventions and researching their effectiveness is increasing. Several systematic reviews of participation in health research have recently been completed, which note a number of challenges in documenting the impact of participation. Challenges include working across stakeholders with different understandings of participation and levels of experience in reviewing; comparing heterogeneous populations and contexts; configuring findings from often thin descriptions of participation in academic papers; and dealing with different definitions of impact. This paper aims to advance methods for systematically reviewing the impact of participation in health research, drawing on recent systematic review guidance. Practical examples for dealing with issues at each stage of a review are provided based on recent experience. Recommendations for improving primary research on participation in health are offered and key points to consider during the review are summarised.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHumansPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID29862298
PMCPMC5971326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.