Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31660220›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2018

A Community Engagement Advisory Board as a strategy to improve research engagement and build institutional capacity for community-engaged research.

Alicia K Matthews, Emily E Anderson, Marilyn Willis, Amparo Castillo, Wendy Choure

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Alicia K MatthewsCollege of Nursing, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Emily E AndersonStritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA.
Marilyn WillisThe Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Amparo CastilloJane Adams School of Social Work, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Wendy ChoureThe Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.

Funding

Strengthening Stakeholder Engagement in Human Research Protections.UL1TR002003 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI KARNIK, NIRANJAN SUBHASH, MERMELSTEIN, ROBIN J. · 2016 to 2024
$33.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCommunity engagement is deemed as critical to the success of the CTSA program. In 2009, to improve research engagement and build capacity for community-engaged research across the translational spectrum, the Center for Clinical and Translational Science at the University of Illinois at Chicago created a Community Engagement Advisory Board (CEAB). Here, we report results of our ongoing evaluation efforts.

methodsCEAB activities are evaluated using mixed methods. Annual CEAB evaluation surveys were completed from 2010 to 2016 (n=106 respondents). In 2014, two 90-minute focus groups were conducted with a subset of recent CEAB members (n=19).

resultsSurvey data suggest respondents perceive their consultations to be helpful in improving the capacity of researchers (90%) and the quality of research projects (80%). Further, CEAB members perceive themselves to have personally benefitted from their involvement including obtaining new knowledge (84%), expansion of their networks (76%), and forming new community linkages (51%). Results of the qualitative data were consistent with survey data.

conclusionsOur CEAB has improved research engagement and developed institutional capacity to conduct community-engaged research in several ways. Our findings can inform the establishment or enhancement of community engagement services for CTSA-affiliated researchers and community partners.

Indexed as

clinical and translational sciencesCommunity engagementCommunity Engagement Advisory Boardsevaluationmixed-methods research

Identifiers

PMID31660220
PMCPMC6799353

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.