Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37380973›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

Building trust: Leadership reflections on community empowerment and engagement in a large urban initiative.

Amy E Lansing, Natalie J Romero, Elizabeth Siantz, Vivianne Silva, Kimberly Center, Danielle Casteel, Todd Gilmer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Addressing Power in Local-Level Policies and Programs to Reduce Health Inequities - A Systematic Review.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Engagement in women's health: a history.Research involvement and engagement · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

7 authors.

Amy E LansingDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. alansing@health.ucsd.edu.
Natalie J RomeroHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Elizabeth SiantzCollege of Social Work, University of Utah, Salt Lake, USA.
Vivianne SilvaDepartment of Education and Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA.
Kimberly CenterHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Danielle CasteelHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Todd GilmerHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.

Funding

Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health, United States MH250008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrust is essential for healthy, reciprocal relationships; creating safe environments; engaging in transparent interactions; successfully negotiating power differentials; supporting equity and putting trauma informed approaches into practice. Less is known, however, about the ways that trust-building may be at the forefront of consideration during community capacity building efforts, what trust-building elements are perceived as essential for optimally engaging communities, and what practices might support these efforts.

methodsThe present study examines an evolving understanding of trust-building over the course of 3 years, from qualitative data derived during interviews with nine agency leads from a large and diverse urban community, who are spearheading community-based partnerships to create more trauma-informed communities and foster resiliency.

resultsData reflected fourteen trust-building elements, captured by three themes: 1) Building relationships and engagement (e.g., behavioral practices such as meeting people "where they are at" and creating safe spaces), 2) Embodying core values of trustworthiness (e.g., traits such as being transparent and embodying benevolence), and 3) Sharing decision-making, championing autonomy, and addressing barriers to trust (e.g., collaborative practices such as creating a shared vision and goals and addressing systemic inequities). These trust-building elements are presented in the Community Circle of Trust-Building, which provides an accessible, visual format that can facilitate capacity building efforts within organizations and with the broader community; guide the selection of training opportunities that support healthy interpersonal relationships; and aid in the identification of relevant, supporting frameworks (e.g., health equity, trauma-informed practices, inclusive leadership models).

conclusionsCommunity engagement and trust are essential for overall health and well-being, increasing equitable access to resources, and supporting an effective and connected citizenry. These data shed light on opportunities for trust-building and thoughtful engagement among agencies working directly with community members in large urban areas.

Indexed as

LeadershipTrustCapacity BuildingData AccuracyHumansInterpersonal RelationsAdverse Childhood ExperiencesCommunity Capacity BuildingCommunity EmpowermentCommunity EngagementEquityHealth DisparitiesTrauma Informed PracticesTrust-buildingTrustworthiness

Identifiers

PMID37380973
PMCPMC10304359

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.