ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2024
Community advisory board members' perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community Advisory Board Members Speak Out: Insights From an Opioid Overdose Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- A case study of enhancing bidirectional feedback between research programs and an institutional community engagement advisory board.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- "Being treated as the expert:" A blueprint for a community advisory board approach to elevate the voice of people with living experience with substance use in academic research.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Reframing advisory as leadership to promote equity in trauma-informed community-engaged research: A case study of Yolo County, CA.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- "Because we're the experts": centering the expertise of people who use drugs to identify and propose solutions for overdose prevention.Harm reduction journal · 2025Article
- CENTER-ing Black voices: incorporating lived experience across the research process to advance equity in drug treatment and outcomes.Harm reduction journal · 2025Article
- Developing an Online Community Advisory Board (CAB) of Parents From Social Media to Co-Design an Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Intervention: Participatory Research Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Overcoming inertia: Provider perspectives on de-implementation strategies in preoperative testing.American journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Erratum: Community advisory board members' perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study - CORRIGENDUM.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Community advisory boards (CABs) are an established approach to ensuring research reflects community priorities. This paper examines two CABs that are part of the HEALing Communities Study which aims to reduce overdose mortality. This analysis aimed to understand CAB members' expectations, experiences, and perspectives on CAB structure, communication, facilitation, and effectiveness during the first year of an almost fully remote CAB implementation. Current literature exploring these perspectives is limited. Methods: We collected qualitative and survey data simultaneously from members ( Results: CAB members expressed strong commitment to overall study goals and valued the representation of occupational sectors. The qualitative data described a dissonance between CAB members' commitment to the mission and unmet expectations for influencing the study within an advisory role. Survey results indicated lower satisfaction with the research teams' ability to create a mutually beneficial process, clear communication, and sharing of power. Conclusion: Building a CAB on a remote platform, within a study utilizing a community engagement strategy, still presents challenges to fully realizing the potential of a CAB. These findings can inform more effective operationalizing of community-engaged research through enhanced CAB engagement.
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.