ArticleHealth research policy and systems2018
Evaluating the impact of a network of research partnerships: a longitudinal multiple case study protocol.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The co-development and evaluation of an e-learning course on spinal cord injury physical activity counselling: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2024Trial
- Experiences on the implementation and maintenance of the Canadian Disability Participation Project: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Developing, implementing, and monitoring tailored strategies for integrated knowledge translation in five sub-Saharan African countries.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Introducing the Practice Dive Approach: an extension of co-creation in physical activity promotion and health promotion.Health promotion international · 2021Article
- Co-creating physical activity interventions: a mixed methods evaluation approach.Health research policy and systems · 2021Article
- Logic model framework for considering the inputs, processes and outcomes of a healthcare organisation-research partnership.BMJ quality & safety · 2020Article
- Experience of Health Leadership in Partnering With University-Based Researchers in Canada - A Call to "Re-imagine" Research.International journal of health policy and management · 2019Article
- Move the north: evaluation of a regional stakeholder engagement initiative to support the development of a community-partnered physical activity research agenda.Research involvement and engagement · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConducting and/or disseminating research together with community stakeholders (e.g. policy-makers, practitioners, community organisations, patients) is a promising approach to generating relevant and impactful research. However, creating strong and successful partnerships between researchers and stakeholders is complex. Thus far, an in-depth understanding of how, when and why these research partnerships are successful is lacking. The aim of this study is to evaluate and explain the outcomes and impacts of a national network of researchers and community stakeholders over time in order to gain a better understanding of how, when and why research partnerships are successful (or not).
methodsThis longitudinal multiple case study will use data from the Canadian Disability Participation Project, a large national network of researchers and community stakeholders working together to enhance community participation among people with physical disabilities. To maximise the impact of research conducted within the Canadian Disability Participation Project network, researchers are supported in developing and implementing knowledge translation plans. The components of the RE-AIM framework (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance) will guide this study. Data will be collected from different perspectives (researchers, stakeholders) using different methods (logs, surveys, timeline interviews) at different time points during the years 2018-2021. A combination of data analysis methods, including network analysis and cluster analysis, will be used to study the RE-AIM components. Qualitative data will be used to supplement the findings and further understand the variation in the RE-AIM components over time and across groups. DISCUSSION: The outcomes, impacts and processes of conducting and disseminating research together with community stakeholders will be extensively studied. The longitudinal design of this study will provide a unique opportunity to examine research partnerships over time and understand the underlying processes using a variety of innovative research methods (e.g. network analyses, timeline interviews). This study will contribute to opening the 'black box' of doing successful and impactful health research in partnership with community stakeholders.
trial registrationOpen Science Framework: https://osf.io/kj5xa/ .
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.