ArticlePloS one2025
Knowledge mobilization with and for equity-deserving communities invested in research: A scoping review protocol.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The practice of putting research into action is known by various names, depending on disciplinary norms. Knowledge mobilization, translation, and transfer (collectively referred to as K*) are three common terminologies used in research literature. Knowledge-to-action opportunities and gaps in academic research often remain obscure to non-academic community partners and researchers in communities, policy and decision makers, and practitioners who could benefit from up-to-date information on health and wellbeing. Academic research training, funding, and performance metrics rarely prioritize or address non-academic community needs from research. We propose to conduct a scoping review on reported K* in community-driven research contexts, examining the governance, processes, methods, and benefits of K*, and mapping who, what, where, and when K* terminology is used. This protocol paper outlines our approach to gathering, screening, analyzing, and reporting on available published literature from four databases.
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.