ArticlePublic understanding of science (Bristol, England)2026
Public engagement professionals: Exploring ethical tensions in communication, engagement and co-creation.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent decades have seen the rising establishment of public engagement professionals supporting communication and engagement in the contexts of science and health research. This article explores how public engagement professionals consider the ethical dimensions of their work. Based on analysis of 17 interviews with science communication and public engagement specialists at UK academic institutions and in practice settings, we examine the ways in which they frame ethical issues associated with engagement, as well as how they frame both publics and researchers. In doing so, we explore two tensions that together highlight how the rising popularity of engagement methods, including engaged research, can increase awareness of the need to ethically scrutinise engagement and associated practices. We also argue that public engagement professionals can further contribute to and advance academic discussion around engagement, arguing that ongoing research
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.