Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40052049›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025

Institutional community engagement leader perspectives on supporting ethical community-engaged research.

Stephanie Solomon Cargill, Nancy Shore, Rachel Olech, Phoebe Friesen, Jessica Rowe, Sana Khoury-Shakour, Emily E Anderson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

7 authors.

Stephanie Solomon CargillSaint Louis University, St Louis, MO, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1782-0481
Nancy ShoreUniversity of New England, Portland, ME, USA.
Rachel OlechUniversity of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Phoebe FriesenMcGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jessica RoweYale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Sana Khoury-ShakourUniversity of California, Santa Cruz, CA, USA.
Emily E AndersonLoyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2197-1239

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Over the last couple of decades, there has been a growing awareness of the value of community-engaged research (CEnR). Simultaneously, many academic institutions have established centralized support for CEnR. For example, dozens of academic medical centers in the United States receive National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) and have embedded community engagement programs (CE) whose primary expertise and mission is to advance CEnR at their institutions. Methods: As part of a larger interview study aiming to learn more about how institutional CE programs and HRPPs work together, we analyzed interviews with CE program leaders at academic medical centers that receive funding from the NIH CTSA program to identify barriers and strategies to conducting CEnR at their institutions, primarily focusing on the relationships with Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). Results: We identified three categories in the interviews: barriers and strategies vis-à-vis IRBs to address 1) CE/IRB relationships; 2) Understanding issues; and 3) Structural and resource issues. Conclusions: CTSA CE program leaders have experience implementing solutions to common barriers to IRB review faced by CEnR researchers. The barriers they face in these three categories and the strategies they use to overcome them can provide helpful insights to others who hope to facilitate CEnR research at their institutions.

Indexed as

Clinical and Translational Science AwardCommunity-engaged researchcommunity engagementInstitutional Review Boardinterviewsqualitative

Identifiers

PMID40052049
PMCPMC11883558

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.