Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38128570›Full record

ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2024

[Planning, Reflecting and Evaluating Participatory Health Research: Adaptation and Piloting of the "Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) Model" for German-Speaking Countries].

Theresa Allweiss, Ina Schaefer, Theresia Krieger, Frank M Amort, Michael Wright, Antje Dresen

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2024. 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. Observational
  3. [A qualitative interview study to streamline integration of patient participation in research].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Theresa AllweissInstitut für Soziale Gesundheit, Katholische Hochschule für Sozialwesen Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3058-0563
Ina SchaeferPartizipative Ansätze in den Sozial- und Gesundheitswissenschaften, Alice Salomon Hochschule Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Theresia KriegerInstitut für Medizinische Psychologie - Neuropsychologie und Gender Studies, Universität zu Köln Medizinische Fakultät, Köln, Germany.
Frank M AmortInstitut Gesundheits- und Tourismusmanagement, FH Joanneum GmbH Institut Gesundheits- und Tourismusmanagement, Bad Gleichenberg, Austria.
Michael WrightInstitut für Soziale Gesundheit, Katholische Hochschule für Sozialwesen Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Antje DresenInstitut für Medizinsoziologie, Versorgungsforschung und Rehabilitationswissenschaft, Universität zu Köln Medizinische Fakultät, Köln, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Participatory research approaches are becoming increasingly established in both academic and practice settings. The participation of people with varied lived experiences and professional backgrounds can help academia and practitioners to learn from and empower each other. In the exchange of different perspectives, needs and ideas, it is possible to plan, reflect on, implement and evaluate projects in the health sector jointly and with attention to the needs of all stakeholders. The Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) Model is often used internationally to guide participatory processes. However, an accessible translation has been lacking for application in German-speaking countries. To address this problem, a multidisciplinary working group composed of academic researchers and practitioners came together within the German-speaking Participatory Health Research Network (PartNet) to adapt the CBPR model for German-speaking countries and to test the adapted version with potential users. The adaptation was more than a translation, as the four model components "Contexts", "Partnership Processes", "Intervention & Research" and "Outcomes" as well as their associated contents are not directly applicable to the socio-structural and political contexts of the German-speaking countries. This article describes the process of adapting the model. This includes how translation drafts for German-speaking countries were first discussed in detail and then agreed upon as an initial template for testing in practice. Subsequently, various users reflected on the German-language model based on their experience of testing it in different projects, focusing on accuracy, comprehensibility and applicability. At the same time, the model was presented and discussed at conferences. The diverse feedback was incorporated into further revisions of the model. The result is a German-language version called "Modell für partizipative Gesundheitsforschung (PGF-Modell)".

Indexed as

Community-Based Participatory ResearchLanguageGermanyHumansResearch Personnel

Identifiers

PMID38128570
PMCPMC10883004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.