ArticlePloS one2020
Community partners' responses to items assessing stakeholder engagement: Cognitive response testing in measure development.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring Research Engagement among Previously Incarcerated Persons and Other Carceral Stakeholders while Implementing Wastewater-based Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in Jails: A Mixed-Methods Study.Research square · 2025Article
- Racial Composition of Social Environments Over the Life Course Using the Pictorial Racial Composition Measure: Development and Validation Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Using Cognitive Interviewing to Develop Rating Scales of Suicide Thoughts and Behaviors in Preadolescent Children.The journal of applied research on children : informing policy for children at risk · 2023Article
- Construct validation of the Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST).Research involvement and engagement · 2022Article
- A Study Examining the Usefulness of a New Measure of Research Engagement.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Development and Co-design of NeuroOrb: A Novel "Serious Gaming" System Targeting Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson's Disease.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Development and Validation of a Brief Version of the Research Engagement Survey Tool.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite recognition of the importance of stakeholder input into research, there is a lack of validated measures to assess how well constituencies are engaged and their input integrated into research design. Measurement theory suggests that a community engagement measure should use clear and simple language and capture important components of underlying constructs, resulting in a valid measure that is accessible to a broad audience.
objectiveThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate how community members understood and responded to a measure of community engagement developed to be reliable, valid, easily administered, and broadly usable.
methodCognitive response interviews were completed, during which participants described their reactions to items and how they processed them. Participants were asked to interpret item meaning, paraphrase items, and identify difficult or problematic terms and phrases, as well as provide any concerns with response options while responding to 16 of 32 survey items.
resultsThe results of the cognitive response interviews of participants (N = 16) suggest concerns about plain language and literacy, clarity of question focus, and the lack of context clues to facilitate processing in response to items querying research experience. Minimal concerns were related to response options. Participants suggested changes in words and terms, as well as item structure.
conclusionQualitative research can improve the validity and accessibility of measures that assess stakeholder experience of community-engaged research. The findings suggest wording and sentence structure changes that improve ability to assess implementation of community engagement and its impact on research 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.