ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Researcher and community partner perspectives on community-engaged research during the COVID-19 pandemic.
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 Change Club intervention: 2-year impacts from a cluster-randomized trial in rural communities in New York and Texas.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: We sought to explore how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted community-engaged research (CEnR) from both researcher and community partner perspectives, identify challenges and facilitators affecting their experiences, and describe desired supports for CEnR during future health crises. Methods: We conducted semi-structured, virtual interviews with ten researchers and eight partners who conducted or collaborated on CEnR during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis. We analyzed the transcribed data thematically through an iterative process involving memoing, consensus coding, and reviewing memos and code reports to identify and describe key categories and themes. Results: Challenges identified were related to wellbeing and personal circumstances, such as feeling burnt out, managing increased caregiving responsibilities, or concern about risk of illness; institutional barriers, such as inflexible and burdensome financial, regulatory, and administrative policies; and virtual engagement, such as distractions, limited Internet access, or difficulty forming relationships online. Facilitators fell into two categories. Foundational factors such as strong existing partnerships, funding, and project-specific circumstances were critical to facilitating CEnR activities. Strategy-based facilitators focused on overcoming challenges and included communication, flexibility, risk mitigation, and utilizing techniques to enhance virtual engagement. Desired supports included flexible funding, resources for navigating research during crises, and increased virtual engagement accessibility and guidance. Conclusions: By better understanding challenges and facilitators affecting experiences of researchers and community partners during the COVID-19 pandemic, we can develop strategies and resources to better support CEnR partnerships during future crises.
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.