ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2024
Examining the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Remote Training on Community-Based Participatory Research: Single-Arm Pre-Post Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Barriers and Facilitators to Timely Adjuvant Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer in Rural Care.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the past decade, a growing body of scientific evidence has demonstrated that community engagement in research leads to more relevant research, enhances the uptake of research findings, and improves clinical outcomes. Despite the increasing need for the integration of community engagement methodologies into the scientific inquiry, doctoral and master's level competencies in the field of psychiatry often lack dedicated training or coursework on community engagement methodologies.
objectiveA total of 13 service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists (with specialties ranging from basic science to implementation science) aged 18 and older participated in remote training on community-based participatory research. Data were collected at baseline, 2 days, and 3 months.
methodsA total of 13 service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists (with specialties ranging from basic science to implementation science) aged 18 and older participated in remote training on community-based participatory research. Data were collected at baseline, 2 days, and 3 months.
resultsThe pilot study demonstrated that a 3-month remote training on community-based participatory research ("Partnership Academy") was deemed feasible and acceptable by service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists. Improvements were found in research engagement and the quality of partnership. A marked increase in distrust in the medical system was also found. Groups submitted 4 grant applications and published 1 peer-reviewed journal at a 3-month follow-up.
conclusionsThis pre- and postpilot study demonstrated it is possible to train groups of service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists in community-based participatory research. These findings provide preliminary evidence that a 3-month remote training on community-based participatory research ("Partnership Academy") is feasible, acceptable, and potentially associated with improvements in research engagement as well as the quality of partnership and output, such as manuscripts and grant applications.
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.