ReviewHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2024
The Bidirectional Engagement and Equity (BEE) Research Framework to Guide Community-Academic Partnerships: Developed From a Narrative Review and Diverse Stakeholder Perspectives.
Review in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Addressing Power in Local-Level Policies and Programs to Reduce Health Inequities - A Systematic Review.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026Pooled it
- Patients as Co-Researchers in Oncology: A Qualitative Exploration of Participatory Governance.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Addressing Food Insecurity Through Hospital-Community Partnerships in a Changing Policy Landscape.Hospital pediatrics · 2026Article
- Digital and community-engaged approaches to improve research participant recruitment - Advice from forty convened experts.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Differentiated trust: navigating credibility landscapes in community-engaged research.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Listen, Empower, Co-Create: Adapting Boot Camp Translation Methods to Create Culturally Responsive Health Messages and Materials.Health literacy research and practice · 2025Article
- Community-Engaged Approach to Improve Food Access and Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables in a Rural Appalachian Community.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Through the lens of Good Participatory Practice: Findings and lessons learned from the healthcare worker subcommittee of the COVID-19 Healthcare Worker Exposure Response and Outcomes Registry.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Community-based participatory research: a lifeline to achieve people-centered care.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Building Capacity and Trust through Community Engagement: Lessons Learned from a Research in Health Equity Symposium.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe engagement of community partners in equitable partnerships with academic teams is necessary to achieve health equity. However, there is no standardized approach to support bidirectional engagement among research stakeholders in the context of partnership equity at each phase of the research process.
objectiveWe describe the development of a systematic framework along with competencies and tools promoting bidirectional engagement and equity within community-academic partnerships at each phase of the research process.
designWe conducted a four-step research process between November 2020 and December 2023 for framework development: (1) a narrative literature review; (2) expansion of existing bidirectional, equitable framework; (3) a scientific review with two groups of cognitive interviews (five community engagement researchers and five community leaders and members); and (4) three community-based organization leader focus groups. Thematic analysis was used to analyse focus group data.
resultsUsing results of each step, the framework was iteratively developed, yielding four phases of the bidirectional engagement and equity (BEE) research framework: Relationship building and assessment of goals and resources (Phase I); form a community-academic partnership based on shared research interests (may include multilevel stakeholders) (Phase II); develop a research team comprising members from each partnering organization (Phase III); and implement the six-step equitable research process (Phase IV). Bidirectional learning and partnership principles are at the core of the partnership, particularly in Phases II-IV. Competencies and tools for conducting an equitable, engaged research process were provided. DISCUSSION: This conceptual framework offers a novel, stepwise approach and competencies for community-academic partners to successfully partner and conduct the research process equitably.
conclusionThe BEE research framework can be implemented to standardize the conduct of an equitable, engaged research process within a community-academic partnership, while improving knowledge and trust across partners and, ultimately, an increased return on investment and sustainability to benefit both partners in the area of health outcomes and ultimately health equity. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The development of this framework was co-led with a community organization in which two leaders in the organization were equitably involved in each phase of the research process, including grant development, study design, participant recruitment, protocol development for focus groups and community and researcher review, framework design and content and dissemination of this manuscript as a co-author. For grant development, the community leader completed the give-get grid components for them as a partner. They also wrote up their lived experience in the research process for the progress report. For the focus groups, one community leader co-led the focus group with the academic partner. For the narrative review, the community leaders did not actively conduct the narrative review but observed the process through the academic partners. One community leader wrote the section 'relationship building' and 'bidirectional learning' sections with the assistance of the academic partner, while they both equally provided input on other sections of the manuscript alongside academic partners. The community leaders have extensive experience in leading programmes, along with partnering with researchers to address health equity issues and improve health outcomes.
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.