ArticlePublic understanding of science (Bristol, England)2026
The communication of science within the framework of European Union-funded research projects: Exploring practitioners' experiences and perceptions.
Article in Public understanding of science (Bristol, England), 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article aims to advance our understanding of the communication of science conducted within the framework of externally funded research projects, also known as project-based science communication. It deploys semi-structured interviews to explore the experiences and perceptions of 26 communication specialists, project managers and other professionals who have been involved in the Communication & Dissemination Work Packages of Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe projects. Interviewees regard the communication of European Union-funded projects as beneficial, both personally and for society as a whole-in the latter case, primarily in instrumental terms. They identify several challenges to their communication functions, ranging from working conditions to structural factors such as project size or project duration, to the relationship with researchers and other partners. Many interviewees also hold a critical opinion of the current communication practices within European Union-funded projects and acknowledge the potentially detrimental effects of the multiplication of projects with attached communication responsibilities. The ultimate purpose of this article is to elicit interest in project-based science communication within the science communication scholarly community.
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.