Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36227852›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Ten simple rules on how to develop a stakeholder engagement plan.

Susanne Hollmann, Babette Regierer, Jaele Bechis, Lesley Tobin, Domenica D'Elia

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Susanne HollmannSB Science Management UG (haftungsbeschränkt), Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9032-2035
Babette RegiererUniversity of Potsdam, Faculty of Science, Potsdam, Germany.
Jaele BechisUniversité de Lorraine, Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, BETA, Nancy, France.
Lesley TobinRete Europea dell'Innovazione-REDINN, Pomezia, Italy.
Domenica D'EliaInstitute for Biomedical Technologies, National Research Council, Bari, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To make research responsible and research outcomes meaningful, it is necessary to communicate our research and to involve as many relevant stakeholders as possible, especially in application-oriented-including information and communications technology (ICT)-research. Nowadays, stakeholder engagement is of fundamental importance to project success and achieving the expected impact and is often mandatory in a third-party funding context. Ultimately, research and development can only be successful if people react positively to the results and benefits generated by a project. For the wider acceptance of research outcomes, it is therefore essential that the public is made aware of and has an opportunity to discuss the results of research undertaken through two-way communication (interpersonal communication) with researchers. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), an approach that anticipates and assesses potential implications and societal expectations regarding research and innovation, aims to foster inclusive and sustainable research and innovation. Research and innovation processes need to become more responsive and adaptive to these grand challenges. This implies, among other things, the introduction of broader foresight and impact assessments for new technologies beyond their anticipated market benefits and risks. Therefore, this article provides a structured workflow that explains "how to develop a stakeholder engagement plan" step by step.

Indexed as

CommunicationStakeholder ParticipationHumansResearch Personnel

Identifiers

PMID36227852
PMCPMC9560496

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.