ArticleProgress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action2024
Practical Incorporation of Stakeholder-Informed Ethics into Research Funding Decisions.
Article in Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action, 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.
- The US Deprescribing Research Network: a network to catalyze deprescribing science.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Research funding has been criticized as biased against novel initiatives and lacking diversity, which leads to further disparities. Patient and stakeholder engagement could support research that goes beyond traditional paradigms and increases diversity. However, best practices to engage stakeholders in research, including funding decisions, continue to be developed. We report on the implementation of stakeholder input in two federally funded initiatives, one that seeks to advance research reducing disparities, and the other seeks to advance deprescribing research. Overall, the review process includes stakeholders as decision makers and supports their efforts through group discussion and other activities. Reconciling stakeholder input that may differ from scientific peer review is a challenge within the decision for funding. Lessons learned include balancing stakeholder and scientific assessments and including guidance on stakeholder engagement to grant awardees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39308383PMC12707251What 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.