ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2021
[Categorizing methods used in participatory research].
Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participatory Design of AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- [Designing participation-promoting digital health literacy : Experiences from developing a course programme for people with chronic diseases].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025Article
- Challenges and Facilitation Approaches for the Participatory Design of AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- [Public Health and Participation of Experts from Experience in Austria: a First Exploratory Survey].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParticipatory research methods are gaining interest. In applying these methods, there is often a lack of consideration for methodological issues. Furthermore, a unifying system for categorizing the various approaches does not exist.
objectivesBased on a scoping review, a categorization of participatory research methods to promote health equity was undertaken. MATERIAL AND
methodsIncluded in the review are 44 publications in German and English retrieved from various databases (PubMed, PsycInfo, SocIndex, Livivo, Cochrane, Fachportal Pädagogik). Additional publications were identified by hand searching and using the snowball method.
resultsThe methods are categorized by research phase and type of format used. The principles of multidimensionality and phase integration are central to the proposed system of categorization, resulting in a primary distinction between the methods used to facilitate the participatory research process versus methods used for participatory data collection and analysis. The majority of methods identified are used for data collection or reflexive processes. There are gaps in the German literature regarding methods for cooperative decision making, participatory data analysis, and the application of research results.
conclusionThe classification system provides an overview of available methods and the degree of participation they promote. The system draws attention to the spectrum of methods available, being useful for both teaching and research purposes.
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.