Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39024348›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Exploring power and power sharing in participatory health research partnerships: A scoping review protocol.

Nino Burduladze, Laundette P Jones, Brian D Jones, Uchizi Msowoya, Jon Salsberg, Anna Whitney, Meghan Gilfoyle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Nino BurduladzeSchool of Medicine, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-7817-0657
Laundette P JonesUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9614-1363
Brian D JonesCommunity Consultant, The Prized Apex, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Uchizi MsowoyaSchool of Medicine, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Jon SalsbergSchool of Medicine, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-2010-3691
Anna WhitneyDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Community Health Specialist, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.
Meghan GilfoyleSchool of Medicine, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-5613-0304

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionParticipatory health research (PHR) as a research paradigm, guides the research process and strives to achieve positive change in society in the interest of people's health. In this scoping review, PHR will be used as an umbrella term considering a wide range of collaborative research approaches in the health context. PHR is conducted 'with' or 'by' those it intends to benefit, as opposed to 'on' and 'for' them. Their involvement throughout the research process seeks to shift power and decision-making from where they traditionally lay within academia toward community, patient and public end-users. Research cannot be truly participatory without concurrently addressing power dynamics within the partnership and power imbalances in decision making. Therefore, power sharing can be defined as a major factor in building effective academic-community collaborations. This scoping review aims to identify, clarify, and map existing literature on power and power sharing in PHR from both theoretical and practical perspectives. Specifically, we will explore how power is conceptualised throughout the literature, and how power and power sharing are applied and addressed in real-life PHR partnerships. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewer's Manual. This scoping review will consider both empirical and non-empirical research that report on understanding power and power sharing in participatory health research partnerships. All appropriate studies will be retrieved from the following five electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, SocIndex. This review will be limited to articles published in English and from January 1998 to March 2024. As the scoping review aims to capture more than peer-reviewed and published literature, it will also include grey literature such as theses and dissertations, reports, conference proceedings, and editorials. Data from the included literature will be extracted based on the data extraction tool, defined in advance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As primary data will not be collected, ethical approval is not required to conduct the scoping review. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

Indexed as

Community-Based Participatory ResearchCooperative BehaviorHumansPower, PsychologicalResearch DesignScoping Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID39024348
PMCPMC11257268

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.