Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36137130›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

A stakeholder engagement strategy for an ongoing research program in rural dementia care: Stakeholder and researcher perspectives.

Debra Morgan, Julie Kosteniuk, Megan E O'Connell, Norma J Stewart, Andrew Kirk, Allison Cammer, Vanina Dal Bello-Haas, Duane P Minish, Valerie Elliot, Melanie Bayly and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

14 authors.

Debra MorganCanadian Centre for Health & Safety in Agriculture, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6344-6822
Julie KosteniukCanadian Centre for Health & Safety in Agriculture, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Megan E O'ConnellDepartment of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Norma J StewartCollege of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Andrew KirkDepartment of Medicine, Neurology Division, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Allison CammerCollege of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Vanina Dal Bello-HaasSchool of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Duane P MinishCanadian Centre for Health & Safety in Agriculture, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Valerie ElliotCanadian Centre for Health & Safety in Agriculture, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Melanie BaylyCanadian Centre for Health & Safety in Agriculture, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Amanda Froehlich ChowSchool of Public Health, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Joanne BrackenAlzheimer Society of Saskatchewan, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Edna ParrottFamily Caregiver, Yorkton, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Tanis BronnerSaskatchewan Health Authority, Tisdale, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Participatory research approaches have developed in response to the growing emphasis on translation of research evidence into practice. However, there are few published examples of stakeholder engagement strategies, and little guidance specific to larger ongoing research programs or those with a rural focus. This paper describes the evolution, structure, and processes of an annual Rural Dementia Summit launched in 2008 as an engagement strategy for the Rural Dementia Action Research (RaDAR) program and ongoing for more than 10 years; and reports findings from a parallel mixed-methods study that includes stakeholder and researcher perspectives on the Summit's value and impact. Twelve years of stakeholder evaluations were analyzed. Rating scale data were summarized with descriptive statistics; open-ended questions were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis. A thematic analysis was also used to analyze interviews with RaDAR researchers. Rating scale data showed high stakeholder satisfaction with all aspects of the Summit. Five themes were identified in the qualitative data: hearing diverse perspectives, building connections, collaborating for change, developing research and practice capacity, and leaving recharged. Five themes were identified in the researcher data: impact on development as a researcher, understanding stakeholder needs, informing research design, deepening commitment to rural dementia research, and building a culture of engagement. These findings reflect the key principles and impacts of stakeholder engagement reported in the literature. Additional findings include the value stakeholders place on connecting with stakeholders from diverse backgrounds, how the Summit was revitalizing, and how it developed stakeholder capacity to support change in their communities. Findings indicate that the Summit has developed into a community of practice where people with a common interest come together to learn and collaborate to improve rural dementia care. The Summit's success and sustainability are linked to RaDAR's responsiveness to stakeholder needs, the trust that has been established, and the value that stakeholders and researchers find in their participation.

Indexed as

DementiaStakeholder ParticipationHealth Services ResearchHumansResearch PersonnelRural Population

Identifiers

PMID36137130
PMCPMC9499231

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.