ArticleHealth promotion international2025
Strengthening health literacy research through consumer engagement: a qualitative analysis of building and maintaining partnership.
Article in Health promotion international, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Consumer engagement activities are variably implemented across research settings, and the 'science' of consumer engagement is still in its infancy. This study aimed to explore the experiences of community panel members who supported a university-based health literacy research group that delivers experimental and applied health research across a wide variety of health topics. An independent researcher interviewed participants, asking them to reflect on their understanding of health literacy research, their experiences on the panel, and strategies to improve the panel. De-identified transcripts were analysed using Framework analysis. Ten of the 13 Sydney Health Literacy Lab Co-SHeLL community panel members were interviewed (four men; seven born in Australia, six spoke English at home). We generated four themes from the data. The first three emphasized foundational elements that supported deeper consumer engagement: diversity and belonging, trust and respect, and effective structures. The fourth theme described how the panel provided mutual benefits to researchers and consumers through increasing skills and capacities, and that this improved the quality of the research. Participants described this as a gradual process that progressed over the course of the year. This rigorous qualitative evaluation identified values that may be important for long-term partnerships with consumers, particularly for health research groups with a broad remit (e.g. health communication and health promotion) that does not focus on a single health condition. Further research could evaluate this kind of consumer engagement activity over the longer term.
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.