Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41121290›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025

Building and sustaining restorative community trust and engagement: the Co-Researcher Activation Network.

Christy J W Ledford, Lillie D Williamson, Ebony B Whisenant, Traci T Greene, Samantha R Jones, Jennifer L Waller, Teena S Sidibe, Felton David Jackson, Nikeshia LaShaundra Lawson, Justin X Moore and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07489144 (CO-creating Novel, Feasible, and Inclusive Research Methods), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT07489144 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

CO-creating Novel, Feasible, and Inclusive Research Methods

TypeinterventionalSponsorAugusta UniversityRan2025 to 2027Enrolled240ConditionsResearch ParticipationArmsParticipant co-design
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Christy J W LedfordDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, USA. christy.ledford@augusta.edu.
Lillie D WilliamsonDepartment of Communication Arts, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Ebony B WhisenantDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, USA.
Traci T GreeneDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, USA.
Samantha R JonesDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, USA.
Jennifer L WallerDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, USA.
Teena S SidibeCo-Researcher Activation Network, Augusta, USA.
Felton David JacksonCo-Researcher Activation Network, Augusta, USA.
Nikeshia LaShaundra LawsonCo-Researcher Activation Network, Augusta, USA.
Justin X MooreDepartment of Behavioral Science and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA.
Leslie E WolfGeorgia State University College of Law, Atlanta, USA.

Funding

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute EASC-COVID-00249
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAfter identifying substantial trust gaps between our university and neighboring community, we developed the Co-Researcher Activation Network (CRANE) to cultivate restorative engagement through ongoing transformational relationships. Informed by the Culture-Centered Approach, CRANE is a network of community member groups who identify local health concerns, develop research questions, and generate community-driven solutions. Organized by place rather than interest, groups are systematically created within geographic areas. The model focuses on engaging community members as “co-researchers,” whereby community members play an active role and share in the decision-making process through a collaborative and interdependent relationship with the research team.

methodsUsing RE-AIM domains, we applied convergent mixed methods to test the effects of CRANE and to identify factors associated with fidelity and sustainability of the model.

resultsFrom 2022 to 2023, we convened 21 co-researchers in three groups that met bimonthly. Groups reflected age, racial/ethnic, economic, and educational diversity. Co-researchers’ perceptions of university researcher credibility (trustworthiness, expertise, and caring) significantly increased during the project. Five factors contributed to success: regular, audience-centered communication; small groups; gender segregation; scheduling flexibility; and community meeting spaces. Challenges included hiring issues, travel limits, low technology acceptance, transportation obstacles, and participant payment problems.

conclusionsCRANE is a blueprint for community engagement that honors community members and their expertise, strives for equitable partnership, and moves the needle on metrics of trust. The theoretically-grounded, co-researcher model can not only build but sustain restorative community trust and engagement.

Identifiers

PMID41121290
PMCPMC12542406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.