Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39119444›Full record

ArticleQualitative research : QR2024

Anti-oppression as praxis in the research field: Implementing emancipatory approaches for researchers and community partners.

Ruth Rodney, Marsha Hinds, Jessica Bonilla-Damptey, Danielle Boissoneau, Aaliya Khan, Anika Forde

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Qualitative research : QR, 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

6 authors.

Ruth RodneyYork University, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2179-5263
Marsha HindsUniversity of Guelph, Canada.
Jessica Bonilla-DampteySexual Assault Centre (Hamilton and Area), Canada.
Danielle BoissoneauCommunity Lead, Canada.
Aaliya KhanYork University, Canada.
Anika FordeYork University, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) and anti-oppression (AO) policies are implemented in research to address intersecting systemic barriers for marginalized populations. Grant applications now include questions about EDI to ensure researchers have considered how research designs perpetuate discriminatory practices. However, complying with these measures may not mean that researchers have engaged with AO as praxis. Three central points emerged from our work as a women's research collective committed to embedding AO practices within the research methodology of our community-based study. First, research ideas must be connected to larger pursuits of AO in and across marginalized communities. Secondly, AO as praxis in the research design is an exercise in centering cultural knowledge and pragmatic research preparation and response that honours the collective. Lastly, AO approaches are not prescriptive. They must shift, adapt, and change based on the research project and team, creating space for transformative resistance and emancipation of racialized researchers and community workers.

Indexed as

anti-oppressionBlack women’s epistemologiescommunity-based methodologydecolonizationdiversity and inclusionequityIndigenous methodologies

Identifiers

PMID39119444
PMCPMC11303120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.