ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2026
Bridging the gap: Community insights on effectively sharing research findings with the public.
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.
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
Introduction: Funders increasingly emphasize the ethical imperative to return research results, yet researchers often lack training and clear strategies for effectively sharing findings with lay audiences. While publishing in academic journals is standard practice for dissemination, little guidance exists on translating findings for communities, particularly in rural areas. This qualitative community-guided pilot project aimed to explore and strengthen strategies for sharing study results in accessible ways. Methods: The Penn State Clinical and Translational Science Institute conducted six semi-structured focus groups in Fall 2023 with geographically dispersed Pennsylvanians. Focus groups introduced participants with and without prior research experience to evidence-based and novel dissemination methods - such as lay summaries and data walks - to gather feedback on preferences and experiences. Data were coded and analyzed using MAXQDA, achieving strong interrater reliability (kappa > 0.70). Themes were developed inductively. Results: Focus group participants ( Conclusion: Community-informed dissemination approaches can increase research transparency, engagement, and results translation in communities, particularly in rural areas where accessibility is limited.
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.