ArticleJournal of prevention & intervention in the community2026
Evaluating the use of participatory system dynamics group model building for expanding systems thinking capacity among community-based stakeholders.
Article in Journal of prevention & intervention in the community, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) methodologies align closely with the field of community psychology. System dynamics group model building (SD GMB) represents a CBPR-grounded approach that is centered on collaborating with stakeholders to develop a shared understanding of the dynamic complexity of a community problem, represented as a system dynamics (SD) model, and identifying potential solutions. Much is still unknown regarding the value of SD GMB for improving systems thinking capacity among community stakeholders. Therefore, this study evaluates systems thinking capacity among 32 stakeholders who participated in SD GMB workshops from two recent studies. Stakeholders completed a baseline survey before the first SD GMB workshop session and a final evaluation survey following the last session. This survey included a validated systems thinking scale (Dolansky et al., 2020) and a "systems thinking knowledge quiz" (only administered during the baseline survey) developed by the research team to assess stakeholder knowledge of key concepts. Among all stakeholders, the average systems thinking quiz score was nearly 45%, and knowledge quiz scores were higher among stakeholders who were older in age, had lived experience, were in healthcare provider or academic researcher/data professional roles, represented the nonprofit or grassroots sectors, reported prior experience with SD GMB, or did not attend the pre-session orientation. Overall, stakeholders' pretest scores and post-test scores did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference; however, increases in systems thinking mean scores were observed among stakeholders who were younger in age, had lived experience, were in community-based nonprofit staff roles, represented nonprofit or grassroots organizations, did not have prior SD GMB experience, or did not attend orientation. These findings underscore the importance of adopting a more differentiated and context-sensitive approach to evaluating SD GMB interventions. Future research should further explore how participatory modeling fosters systems thinking capacity across different stakeholder groups.
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.