Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38028353›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2023

The community voices program to facilitate community-academic researcher partnerships: Stakeholder perspectives on the program's usefulness.

Magaly Ramirez, Jenny Wool, Sonia Bishop, KeliAnne K Hara-Hubbard, Sou Hyun Jang, Judy Leong, Laurie Hassell, Linda K Ko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2023. 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. Review
  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

8 authors.

Magaly RamirezDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5063-1028
Jenny WoolInstitute of Translational Health Sciences, Seattle, WA, USA.
Sonia BishopDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.
KeliAnne K Hara-HubbardDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.
Sou Hyun JangDepartment of Sociology, Korea University, Seoul, Korea.
Judy LeongVA Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, WA, USA.
Laurie HassellInstitute of Translational Health Sciences, Seattle, WA, USA.
Linda K KoDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

Transform Dissemination and Implementation Science in CTSA ProgramsUL1TR002319 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI John K. Amory · 2017 to 2026
$100.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002319
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The Institute of Translational Health Sciences (Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program hub) developed a program coined Community Voices to invite communities to submit project ideas and be matched with academic researchers. We describe formative research to understand community and academic researcher perspectives on how the program could facilitate collaborations addressing community priorities. Methods: We conducted four focus groups with 31 community-based organization (CBO) representatives and 11 semi-structured interviews with academic researchers in the Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho regions. Questions included the appeal of Community Voices to engage community and academic partners, potential program usefulness, and Community Voices' potential role in building community-academic partnerships. We used an inductive, constant comparison approach to code transcripts and thematic analysis to generate themes. Results: Most CBO representatives were female (87.1%) and Hispanic/Latino (61.3%). Most academic researchers had a PhD (63.6%) and worked at a university (81.8%). The themes were: (1) community-academic partnerships built on trust will offer mutual benefit, (2) community-initiated project ideas should prioritize community needs, (3) matchmaking will accelerate connections but should not replace time to foster partnership, (4) Community Voices should go beyond matchmaking and provide ongoing support/training, and (5) fostering effective communication is key to partnership success. Conclusions: Community Voices is a novel, bidirectional community engagement program model that advances current practices of prioritizing researchers' project ideas. This community-driven program may shift the future direction of community engagement practices where prioritizing community's ideas becomes the norm of community-academic partnerships in clinical and translational science.

Indexed as

clinical and translational science awardcommunity-engaged researchCommunity stakeholdersqualitative research methodstranslational researchers

Identifiers

PMID38028353
PMCPMC10663767

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.