ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2022
Researchers' and Research Users' Experiences With and Reasons for Working Together in Spinal Cord Injury Research Partnerships: A Qualitative Study.
Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Motivations and expectations for spinal cord epidural stimulation study participation: perspectives from individuals with spinal cord injury and caregivers.Spinal cord · 2026Trial
- Functional outcomes and participants' perspectives during short-term application of spinal stimulation in individuals with spinal cord injury.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Trial
- Article
- Building meaningful relationships through co-design: reflections from a participatory multi-year research partnership to create MedManageSCI.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Meaning of Work Participation After Spinal Cord Injury in Bangladesh: A Qualitative Study in a Low- and Middle-Income Country Context.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Article
- 'There has to be some chemistry there': an interpretive description exploring the experiences, motivations and dynamics of partnered child health research.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Priorities and opportunities for advocacy in SCI: An international web-based review.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Review
- Experiences on the implementation and maintenance of the Canadian Disability Participation Project: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Shining a light on the road towards conducting principle-based co-production research in rehabilitation.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- IKT Guiding Principles: demonstration of diffusion and dissemination in partnership.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Systematic overviews of partnership principles and strategies identified from health research about spinal cord injury and related health conditions: A scoping review.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2023Article
- Roles, outcomes, and enablers within research partnerships: A rapid review of the literature on patient and public involvement and engagement in health research.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Review
- Consumer engagement in doctoral research - what difference does it make?Spinal cord · 2023Article
- Comprehensive and person-centred approach in research: what is missing?Spinal cord · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch partnership approaches are becoming popular within spinal cord injury (SCI) health research system, providing opportunities to explore experiences of and learn from SCI research partnership champions. This study aimed to explore and describe SCI researchers' and research users' (RU') experiences with and reasons for conducting and/or disseminating (health) research in partnership in order to gain more insight into potentially ways to build capacity for and foster change to support research partnerships within a health research system.
methodsUnderpinned by a pragmatic perspective, ten semi-structured timeline interviews were conducted with researchers and RU who have experiences with SCI research partnerships. Interviews focused on experiences in participants' lives that have led them to become a person who conducts and/or disseminates research in partnership. Data were analysed using narrative thematic analysis.
resultsWe identified three threads from participants' stories: (1) seeing and valuing different perspectives, (2) inspirational role models, and (3) relational and personal aspect of research partnerships. We identified sub-threads related to experiences that participants draw on how they came to be a person who engage in (health) research partnerships, and sub-threads related to participants' reasons for engaging in research partnerships. While most sub-threads were identified from both researchers' and RU' perspectives (eg, partnership successes and failures), some were unique for researchers (morally the right thing to do) or RU (advocating).
conclusionUsing a narrative and pragmatic approach, this study provided a new understanding of SCI researchers' and RU' partnership experiences over time. We found that participants' research partnership experiences and motivations align with components of leadership theories. The findings from this study may be used to inform strategies and policy programs to build capacity for conducting and disseminating (health) research in partnership, within and beyond SCI research.
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.