ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
"No research about us, without us:" a qualitative study to engage with community research advisory boards in the urban community.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Community Advisory Boards (CABs) and Community Research Advisory Boards (CRABs) are widely used in health research to promote both ethical conduct and build community trust. Despite their growing adoption by universities, limited empirical work has examined how these advisory boards experience engagement with academic researchers. Purpose: This qualitative study explored best practices for engaging CRABs serving urban communities, drawing on the experiences of members of the University of Houston HEALTH Research Center's community research advisory board. Methods: Seven CRAB members participated in two virtual focus groups conducted between November 2024 and February 2025. Participants brought professional expertise across public health, social work, healthcare, and community advocacy. Data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify connecting patterns in participants' experiences, expectations, and perceptions of the academic/community research relationship. Results: Four themes emerged from the research: (1) Urban Communities Want Feedback and Sustained Engagement, (2) Urban Communities Feeling Ignored or Used by Researchers, (3) Urban Communities Want Advocacy and Resources, not Just an Identification of the Problem, and (4) Consequences and Benefits for the Community Connector. Conclusions: Findings highlight that meaningful engagement with urban communities requires reciprocal, sustained partnerships that extend beyond data collection. CRABs can serve as trusted conduits between universities and urban communities when researchers intentionally incorporate community feedback. Additionally, closing communication loops and translating research into actionable benefits can increase community engagement and show that dissemination of academic findings is a priority.
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.