ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2023
Engaging participants with research findings: A rights-informed approach.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reciprocity in research: Participant views on return of results in the WATCH-PD qualitative study.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Article
- Methodologies of Care: A Multimodal, Participatory Research Approach with Vulnerable Families Among South African Communities.Methods and protocols · 2026Article
- Multi-level community dissemination of public health research: insights from the fuel to pot project case study in Kenya and Malawi.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Bridging the gap: Community insights on effectively sharing research findings with the public.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- The practice of public health coordination in Sweden: roles, responsibilities, and realities.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Developing Requirements for a Standardized System to Return Individual Research Results Back to Study Participants: Narrative Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025Review
- Feasibility and acceptability of remote APOE-genotyping among research volunteers of an online recruitment registry (The Dutch Brain Research Registry).The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2025Article
- Engaging participants with research findings: A rights-informed approach.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Mi PROTECT: A personalized smartphone platform to report back results to participants of a maternal-child and environmental health research cohort program in Puerto Rico.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Experiences of sharing results of community based serosurvey with participants in a district of Maharashtra, India.PloS one · 2022Article
- A Guide to Engaging with Media to Amplify Health Research.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSharing research findings with participants is recognized as an ethical imperative for the research community. However, most discourse on this topic in mainstream public health takes a paternalistic approach, with researchers retaining the power to choose if, when, and how research findings are shared.
methodsFieldwork took place from August 2018 to January 2019 and again from August 2019 to December 2019 among two communities in the south Indian state of Kerala. We integrated participant engagement with study findings into the research protocol, using various collaborative strategies identified during the design stage, forming partnerships with participants and determining appropriate forms of dissemination for different participant groups during fieldwork.
resultsFindings from previous research projects undertaken with these communities by other researchers had not been shared with them. This was interpreted by the communities as researchers not being interested in making a difference to their situation. In the current study, building reciprocal relationships that minimized power disparities, and providing outputs in tailored formats that promoted active engagement were key factors that enabled participants to engage with results. This engagement added value by enabling us to co-develop study recommendations. This process also enabled the community to have ownership of the results and use them to advocate for health system change to improve access to health care.
conclusionResearch should be transformative for participating communities. Participants have a right to know the results of the research they participate in since their knowledge provides the research data which can in turn promote community change. Operationalising this requires researchers to build partnerships with participants and their communities from the outset. The role of participants must be reimagined, and adequate resources should be built into the research process. This is both socially responsible and ethical, but also improves the impact and legitimacy of research for the participants and the communities that they represent. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Participants of our research contributed to the design of various aspects of the engagement processes including the venue, the formats used for engagement, interpretation of the findings and recommendations from our 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.