ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
"Our work is recognized and we are prepared:" A qualitative evaluation of a peer-led research best practices training for community health workers and promotoras.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: To overcome the dearth of high-quality, evidence-based, role-specific training for community health workers and promotoras (CHW/Ps) working with research teams, we developed and evaluated a peer-led research best practices training for CHW/Ps. This article qualitatively explores the training experiences from the perspectives of CHW/Ps. Methods: CHW/Ps were recruited from communities and partners affiliated with study sites in Michigan, Florida, and California to participate in peer facilitated trainings in English and Spanish. A purposeful sample of CHW/Ps completed interviews from July to December 2023 about their perceptions of the training. Three coders analyzed the interviews using a combination of the rigorous and accelerated data reduction (RADaR) technique and thematic text analysis. Results: Seventeen CHW/Ps participated in interviews ( Conclusion: A peer-led research best practices training for CHW/Ps is an effective strategy for enhancing CHW/Ps' knowledge and skills. Training CHW/Ps in research best practices is a strategy for enhancing the capacity and capability of this community-engaged research workforce.
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.