Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39731188›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Engaging older adults in the process of aging research: a multimethod study evaluating the experience and efficacy of a citizen advisory group for a dementia risk reduction program.

Danielle D'Amico, Marie Y Savundranayagam, Rose Biles, Inbal Itzhak, Nicole D Anderson, Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA) CAN-THUMBS UP Study Group

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Meta-Research on the Science of Lived Experience Engagement in Mental Health and Substance Use Health Research: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Danielle D'AmicoRotman Research Institute, Baycrest Academy for Research and Education, 3560 Bathurst Street, Toronto, ON, M6A 2E1, Canada.
Marie Y SavundranayagamSchool of Health Studies, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Rose BilesSchool of Health Studies, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Inbal ItzhakCanadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA), Montreal, QC, Canada.
Nicole D AndersonRotman Research Institute, Baycrest Academy for Research and Education, 3560 Bathurst Street, Toronto, ON, M6A 2E1, Canada. nanderson@research.baycrest.org.
Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA) CAN-THUMBS UP Study Group

Funding

UCSD Shiley-Marcos Alzheimer's Disease Research Center P30P30AG062429 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI DOUGLAS R GALASKO · 2019 to 2026
$34.9M
CIHR CNA-163902NIA NIH HHS P30 AG062429
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCollaborative research with end-users is an effective way to generate meaningful research applications and support greater impact on practice and knowledge exchange. To address these needs, a Citizen Advisory Group (CAG) of nine older adults (ages 64-80, 67% women) was formed to advise scientists on the development of Brain Health PRO (BHPro), a web-based platform designed to increase dementia prevention literacy and awareness. The current study evaluated if the CAG met its objectives, how inclusion of the CAG aligned with collaborative research approaches, and the CAG's experience and satisfaction throughout the development process.

methodsAn anonymous online survey was administered to the CAG members and 30 scientist/trainee authors of the BHPro chapters. The CAG also participated in an online focus group.

resultsMost CAG members and chapter authors agreed that the CAG met its primary objectives and added unique value to BHPro. Both groups viewed the CAG's involvement as well-aligned with engaged scholarship, co-production, integrated knowledge translation, and, to a lesser extent, participatory research practices. CAG members reported high satisfaction with personal goal attainment, which included learning, collaborating with others, and making a meaningful impact. Content analyses of the focus group revealed three categories: 1) personal benefits related to learning, connection, and feeling valued, 2) value of a masked peer-review process, and 3) an accessible final product.

conclusionsFindings suggest that collaborating with end-users in the process of aging research confers personal and scientific benefits for both older adults and researchers.

Indexed as

Brain healthCitizen advisory groupCo-creationCollaborative researchEvaluationMultimethodOlder adultsProgram development

Identifiers

PMID39731188
PMCPMC11674478

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.