Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32695491›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2020

Engagement science: The core of dissemination, implementation, and translational research science.

Paul Meissner, Linda B Cottler, Milton Mickey Eder, J Lloyd Michener

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07528846 (Justice Community Overdose Innovation Network II TCU Hub), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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.

NCT07528846 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Justice Community Overdose Innovation Network II TCU Hub: TCU Building Resilient Initiatives for Deflection Through Greater Engagement Project (TCU BRIDGE to Deflection Project)

TypeinterventionalSponsorTexas Christian UniversityRan2026 to 2029Enrolled1,620ConditionsSubstance Use Disorder (SUD), Drug Overdose, Criminal BehaviorArmsCore-interagency community engagement approach, Enhanced-Core plus community engagement specialist
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. An agenda for science communication research and practice.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

4 authors.

Paul MeissnerMontefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3424-2481
Linda B CottlerClinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Milton Mickey EderDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4036-6491
J Lloyd MichenerClinical and Translational Science Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9002-2681

Funding

Using social networks to map and evaluate team science across CTSA hubsUL1TR001427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI MITCHELL, DUANE A. · 2015 to 2024
$37.2M
CTSA Administrative Supplement for Informatics Core: A novel AI/ML system to predict respiratory failure and ARDS in Covid-19 patientsUL1TR002556 · NCATS · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, INC · PI KELLER, MARLA J, KIM, MIMI Y · 2018 to 2022
$26.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001427NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002556
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stakeholder engagement is acknowledged as central to dissemination and implementation (D&I) of research that generates and answers new clinical and health service research questions. There is both benefit and risk in conducting stakeholder engagement. Done wrong, it can damage trust and adversely impact study results, outcomes, and reputations. Done correctly with sensitivity, inclusion, and respect, it can significantly facilitate improvements in research prioritization, communication, design, recruitment strategies, and ultimately provide results useful to improve population and individual health. There is a recognized science of stakeholder engagement, but a general lack of knowledge that matches its strategies and approaches to particular populations of interest based on history and characteristics. This article reviews stakeholder engagement, provides several examples of its application across the range of translational research, and recommends that Clinical Translational Science Awards, with their unique geographical, systems, and historical characteristics, actively participate in deepening our understanding of stakeholder engagement science and methods within implementation and dissemination research. These recommendations include (a) development of an inventory of successful stakeholder engagement strategies; (b) coordination and intentionally testing a variety of stakeholder engagement strategies; (c) tool kit development; and (d) identification of fundamental motivators and logic models for stakeholder engagement to help align stakeholders and researchers.

Indexed as

community engagementCTSAsdissemination and implementation scienceEngagement sciencestakeholder engagement

Identifiers

PMID32695491
PMCPMC7348030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.