Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41694070›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2026

Enhancing health research teams with CONTEXTperts.

William R Phillips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

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

1 author.

William R PhillipsDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2802-4349

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CONTEXTperts (Context and Topic Experts) bring real-world experience in the context of the study topic and setting to enhance research team expertise, capacity, and creativity. They complement but do not replace authentic patient and community engagement, professional consultants, or formal advisory boards. Individual CONTEXTpert consultations or group meetings can help improve research questions, study designs, implementation plans, dissemination, and application of findings. They have added value to a variety of projects with varied research methods and study designs, including research with and without patient or community involvement. CONTEXTperts can bring vision, challenge, and reality checks to a variety of research teams with a practical, affordable model.

Indexed as

Advisory committeesconsultantspublic participationstakeholder engagementteam sciencetranslational research

Identifiers

PMID41694070
PMCPMC12895443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.