ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2020
Parenting Science Gang: radical co-creation of research projects led by parents of young children.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Depression detectives: piloting a methodology for online co-produced research.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Citizen science in psychology: Challenges, opportunities, and recommendations.Behavior research methods · 2026Review
- "Crying in the Wilderness"-The Use of Web-Based Support in Telomere Biology Disorders: Thematic Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Is the Invisibility of Dementia a Super-Power or a Curse? A Reflection on the SUNshiners' Questionnaire into the Public Understanding of Dementia as an Invisible Disability: A User-Led Research Project.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Using social media for patient and public involvement and engagement in health research: The process and impact of a closed Facebook group.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- UK parents' help-seeking for child sleep: A qualitative investigation into parental preferences and reservations about resources.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Practicing engaged research through pandemic times: do not feed the animals?JCOM, Journal of science communication · 2022Article
- More than a method: trusting relationships, productive tensions, and two-way learning as mechanisms of authentic co-production.Research involvement and engagement · 2021Article
- Towards a feminist philosophy of engagements in health-related research.Wellcome open research · 2021Article
- The effects of clothing layers on the thermoregulatory responses to short duration babywearing in babies under 12 months old.Physiological reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundParents are increasingly searching online for information supported by research but can find it difficult to identify results relevant to their own experiences. More troublingly, a number of studies indicate that parenting information found online often can be misleading or wrong. The goal of the Parenting Science Gang (PSG) project was to use the power of the Internet to help parents ask questions they wanted to have answered by scientific research and to feel confident in assessing research evidence.
methodsBy using Facebook to recruit groups and facilitate interactions, PSG was able to engage fully the target public of parents of young children in the radical co-production of scientific studies, while not creating an undue burden on time or restricting participants due to disability, financial status or location. By giving parents true partnership and control of creation of projects, PSG ensured that the chosen questions were ones that were of most relevance and interest to them.
resultsThis paper presents a summary of eight projects, with three in more detail, designed and implemented by PSG Facebook groups in collaboration with experts. Most projects had health related themes, often prompted by dissatisfaction with treatment of parents by health professionals or by feelings of being marginalised by pregnancy and motherhood, as well as by the lack of evidence for their questions and concerns. The PSG approach meant that these frustrations were channelled into actions. All eight of the PSG groups engaged in meaningful interactions with experts and co-produced studies with the groups defining the questions of interest.
conclusionsThis radically user-led design meant that the PSG staff and the collaborating experts had to live with a high degree of uncertainty. Nevertheless, PSG achieved its goal of academically productive, truly co-produced projects, but as important were the positive effects it had on many of the participants, both parents and experts. At the point of writing this paper, PSG projects have led to outputs including at least eight papers published, in press or in preparation, seven conference presentations, testimony to the Infant Feeding All-Party Parliamentary Group, and with more to come.
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.