ArticlePloS one2025
Experiences on the implementation and maintenance of the Canadian Disability Participation Project: A mixed-methods study.
Article in PloS one, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Establishing a multidisciplinary network of researchers, trainees, and research users-such as the Canadian Disability Participation Project (CDPP)-is a promising approach to promote and support research partnerships and improve the application of disability research findings. This study aimed to 1) describe the implementation of the CDPP network over time and 2) explore members' experiences and reflections on the implementation and maintenance of the CDPP network and its partnerships. This mixed-methods study used survey data, collected among CDPP researchers, trainees and research users in the years 2018, 2019 and 2021, and interview data, collected at the end of the study period (2021/2022). Survey items, focused on network functioning and satisfaction (implementation), were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Interviews focused on members' experiences and reflections of the implementation and maintenance of the network and its partnerships, and were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Members were positive about how the network functioned and satisfied with how the CDPP implemented its plans. Over 70% of the survey participants indicated that it was easy to work with researchers/research users in the CDPP network (2018: 71%; 2019: 85%; 2021: 70%). Interview participants discussed the strong leadership of the network, the lack of feeling meaningfully connected to the network as a whole, and key principles that guide the success of individual research partnerships (implementation). Participants reported that (human) resources and continued leadership are needed to sustain the network and its partnerships long-term (maintenance). This study provides unique longitudinal insights into the implementation of a multidisciplinary network of research partnerships. The findings highlighted that building and sustaining a large network of partnerships is challenging and requires strong and continued leadership. To conclude, we describe lessons learned for research partnership capacity building and the translation of disability research to practice and policy.
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.