Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34479622›Full record

ReviewResearch involvement and engagement2021

Engaging citizens living in vulnerable circumstances in research: a narrative review using a systematic search.

N S Goedhart, C A C M Pittens, S Tončinić, T Zuiderent-Jerak, C Dedding, J E W Broerse

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Research involvement and engagement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The Role of Power in Co-Approaches to Health Research: Insights From Spain and the United Kingdom With a Rapid Review of Reviews.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

N S GoedhartAthena Institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. n.s.goedhart@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5975-9749
C A C M PittensAthena Institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
S TončinićAthena Institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
T Zuiderent-JerakAthena Institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C DeddingDepartment of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J E W BroerseAthena Institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLNetherlands Leprosy Relief · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although public engagement in research is increasingly popular, the involvement of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances is rarely realized. This narrative review aims to describe and critically analyse concerns and corresponding strategies, tools, and methods that could support the inclusion of these citizens in health research. The 40 studies that are included were thematically analysed using the socioecological model. Concerns originate most often on the intrapersonal level of the socioecological model, but concerns were also identified at institutional, community, and policy levels. It is thought-provoking that there is a lack of attention for the research and policy structure in which engagement practices are designed, implemented and evaluated. More research is needed to explore how these cultures could be changed in a way that promotes rather than restrains the engagement of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances in research and policymaking.

Indexed as

Citizens living in vulnerable circumstancesHealth inequalitiesMethodsNarrative reviewPatient engagementPublic engagementSocioecological modelSocioeconomic inequalities

Identifiers

PMID34479622
PMCPMC8414765
OpenAlexW3198877946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.