ArticleHealth research policy and systems2020
Stakeholders' experiences of the public health research process: time to change the system?
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Stakeholder engagement in healthcare research in India - A systematic review.Health research policy and systems · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Conducting cross-sectoral collaborative research for food system transformation: learnings from a qualitative evaluation study.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Partnerships in Public Health Economics: Reflective Lessons from UK Obesity Research.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Article
- Process Evaluation of Interdisciplinary Experiences During the Development of a Serious Game About Radiotherapy for Children: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Facilitating collaboration between public health researchers and policymakers: a scoping review of global practices, barriers and facilitators.Health research policy and systems · 2026Review
- Community participation and consultation in palliative and end-of-life care: Building death literacy through a participatory theory of change.Palliative care and social practice · 2026Article
- Knowledge translation platforms: Broker, intermediary or more? A scoping review of definitions, functions and characteristics.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- A Formative Evaluation of Interventions to Enhance Clinical Trial Diversity Guided by the Socioecological Model.Cancers · 2025Article
- Priorities and expectations of researchers, funders, patients and the public regarding equity in medical research and funding: results from the PERSPECT qualitative study.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Increasing the Uptake of Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Via the MAwar Application: Stakeholder-Driven Web Application Development Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Examining the implementation of facility-based integrated management of childhood illness and insecticide treated nets in Bangladesh: lessons learned through implementation research.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- Accelerating implementation of adolescent digital health prevention programs: analysis of insights from Australian stakeholders.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Mechanisms of young professional engagement in health policy development: a cultural domain approach.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Harnessing citizen science in health promotion: perspectives of policy and practice stakeholders in Australia.Health promotion international · 2023Article
- Listening to stakeholders in the prevention of gender-based violence among young people in Spain: a qualitative study from the positivMasc project.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- A pragmatic strength and conditioning intervention for firefighters: Feasibility of the Tactical Athlete Resilience Program (TARP).Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2023Article
- Exploring how to improve the involvement of Polish and South Asian communities around big data research. A qualitative study using COM-B model.International journal of population data science · 2023Article
- Article
- Cross-sector co-creation of a community-based physical activity program for breast cancer survivors in Colombia.Health promotion international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe importance of engaging stakeholders in the research process is well recognised. Whilst engagement is important, guidelines and practices vary for how stakeholders should be involved in research and how to facilitate effective collaborative relationships.
methodsThis study aimed to explore the perspectives and experiences of stakeholders involved in the policy and practice area of outdoor space and non-communicable disease prevention. Stakeholders interviewed included academics, practitioners, policy-makers, knowledge brokers and a funder.
resultsThe findings suggest that stakeholders had positive experiences when engaged meaningfully in the research process, where research projects were carefully planned and managed with attention to context and culture, and where the research team was effective, respectful and communicative. These factors help to facilitate the translation of research into policy and practice. However, multiple challenges of collaborative research were identified which related to structural and systemic challenges, building and maintaining relationships, use and collection of data and information, cultural perceptions of research and research generation, and getting evidence into action. Participants felt that changing the funding system, exploring more collaborative research methodologies, improved research translation, and more effective collaborative relationships at all stages of the research process could address some of these challenges.
conclusionsThe findings highlight that, whilst stakeholder engagement in research was considered important, structural, cultural and individual practices impacted how this worked in practice. Identifying and testing solutions to address these challenges could improve synergies between research, policy, and practice and lead to the production of impactful research that reduces wastage of public funding, improves implementation of findings and ultimately improves public health outcomes.
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.