ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
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.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. 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 'Public' in Public Involvement: A Call to Centre Frontline Staff Voices in Health Workforce Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Participant representation, including the Good Participatory Practice guidelines, in the design and execution of clinical research can profoundly affect research structure and process. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, an online registry called the Healthcare Worker Exposure Response and Outcomes (HERO) Registry, was launched to capture the experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) on the pandemic frontlines. It evolved into a program that distributed COVID-19-related information and connected participants with COVID-19-related research opportunities. Furthermore, a subcommittee of HCWs was created to inform the COVID-19-related clinical research, engagement, and communication efforts. This paper, coauthored by the HERO HCW subcommittee, describes how it was formed, the impact of community participation on the HERO Registry and Research Program, reflections on lessons learned, and implications for future research. Engagement of the HCW Subcommittee resulted in representing their lived experience and ensured that their perspectives as HCWs were incorporated into the HERO Research. The strategies not only supported recruitment and retention efforts but also influenced the HERO research team in framing research questions and data collection pertinent to the participant community. This experience demonstrated the importance of having participants' input as expert advisors to an investigative team in their research efforts during a global health emergency.
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.