Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39529198›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Building trust and inclusion with under-served groups: a public involvement project employing a knowledge mobilisation approach.

Anna M Anderson, Lucy Brading, Laura Swaithes, Nicola Evans, Sophia E Fedorowicz, Darren Murinas, Elizabeth Atkinson, Alice Moult, Tatum Yip, Parveen Ayub and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Public Involvement in a Systematic Review Project: Reporting Our Approach Using the ACTIVE Framework.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  9. 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

15 authors.

Anna M AndersonLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. a.anderson@leeds.ac.uk.
Lucy BradingLeeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Laura SwaithesImpact Accelerator Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Nicola EvansImpact Accelerator Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Sophia E FedorowiczExpert Citizens CIC, Stoke-On-Trent, UK.
Darren MurinasExpert Citizens CIC, Stoke-On-Trent, UK.
Elizabeth AtkinsonNIHR Leeds Biomedical Research Centre, Leeds, UK.
Alice MoultImpact Accelerator Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Tatum YipHealthwatch Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Parveen AyubHealthwatch Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Krysia DziedzicImpact Accelerator Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Philip G ConaghanLeeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Gretl A McHughSchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Amy RebaneNIHR Leeds Biomedical Research Centre, Leeds, UK.
Sarah R KingsburyLeeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR205217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCertain groups are commonly under-served by health research due to exclusionary models of research design/delivery. Working in partnership with under-served groups is key to improving inclusion. This project aimed to explore the use of a knowledge mobilisation approach to start building partnerships with under-served groups based on trust and mutual understanding.

methodsThis co-produced public involvement project employed a knowledge mobilisation approach. The project team involved public contributors from four community organisations and staff from two Universities. A series of 'community conversations' were co-produced. These involved open discussions with local people in community settings. The conversations provide an informal space to engage in a multi-directional dialogue about health research and incorporated approaches such as prompt questions, live illustrations, and themed boards. The findings were reviewed collectively. Dissemination/feedback activities and lessons learned for future engagement with community organisations and under-served groups were also co-produced.

resultsOver 100 people attended the community conversations. Attendees varied widely in their sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., socioeconomic status and ethnicity) and brought diverse lived experiences (e.g., experiences of homelessness and disability). A strong appetite for change and desire to mobilise public knowledge were evident. Attendees reported wide-ranging barriers to inclusion in health research and suggested ways to address them. Three inter-related take-home messages were identified: ensure relevance, appreciation, and trust; prioritise language and accessibility needs; and maximise flexibility in all research-related activities. Feedback about the community conversations and dissemination activities was largely positive, with all parties planning to continue the partnership building. The lessons learned provide practical suggestions for promoting inclusion in research and highlight the importance of addressing research teams' training/support needs.

conclusionsKnowledge mobilisation was a valuable approach for facilitating multi-directional dialogues and relationship building between local communities and university teams. This approach enabled co-creation of new knowledge related to inclusion and partnership working in health research. The project has provided a firm foundation to build upon. However, creating sustainable, inclusive public partnerships is likely to require systemic changes, such as weighting of fundings schemes to projects that prioritise inclusion of under-served groups throughout the research cycle.

Indexed as

Community conversationsCommunity engagementCo-productionInclusionKnowledge mobilisationPublic involvementPublic partnershipTrustUnder-served groups

Identifiers

PMID39529198
PMCPMC11555807

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.