Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30353249›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2019

Go Slow to Go Fast: Successful Engagement Strategies for Patient-Centered, Multi-Site Research, Involving Academic and Community-Based Organizations.

Laura T Pinsoneault, Emily R Connors, Elizabeth A Jacobs, Jerica Broeckling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Engaging the disability community in informatics research: rationales and practical steps.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Laura T PinsoneaultSpark Policy Institute, Denver, CO, USA.
Emily R ConnorsClinical and Translational Science Institute, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA. connors.em83@gmail.com.
Elizabeth A JacobsDell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Jerica BroecklingAlliance for Strong Families and Communities, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2010, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) was created to fund patient-centered research that meaningfully engages stakeholders impacted by that research. As a result, investigators became interested in understanding who are appropriate stakeholders and what meaningful engagement in research looks like (6, 8-10).

objectiveTo understand how and when stakeholder engagement worked well and identify areas for enhancing engagement in a PCORI-funded research study of peer-to-peer support of older adults in three communities across the USA.

designQualitative interview study.

participantsTwelve members of the inter-disciplinary research team. APPROACH: Interviews were conducted via phone, recorded, and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using a constant comparative method to identify themes. Transcripts were independently coded; coded themes were discussed by a small group of the research team to check interpretation and clarify meaning. Once initial themes were identified, the interviews and codes were shared with an external consultant who recoded all 12 transcripts and conducted further analysis and interpretation. Documentation from research meetings was used to validate our findings. KEY

resultsStrategies for facilitating meaningful engagement in the partnership, proposal, study design, and planning phase were very similar to community-based participatory research and include the use of community to identify research needs, equitable compensation and leadership, and budgeting for engagement activities. Strategies in the data collection phase include the use of cultural brokers, weekly data calls between the academic PI and imbedded research assistants, and maintaining joint ownership for research.

conclusionsMajor funding institutions (e.g., NIH, PCORI) recognize that community engagement leads to higher quality, more meaningful research (7, 21). Our results support that assumption and in addition, suggest an investment in engagement strategies at the onset of a research project and the use of cultural brokers can greatly contribute to the success of implementing a large, multi-site research project.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentQualitative ResearchCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchComparative Effectiveness ResearchHumansPatient-Centered CarePatient Participationagingcommunity-based participatory researchevaluationpatient-centered outcomes researchqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID30353249
PMCPMC6318189

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.