ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026
Actively engaging multi-level stakeholders in cancer screening and cancer-related studies: a scoping review.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 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
backgroundThere are many stakeholders involved in cancer screening and cancer-related research, including those from the micro, meso, and macro levels. The ways in which stakeholders are engaged are numerous, with some methods being more active than others. There has been limited investigation into which stakeholders are being engaged, how they're being engaged, and if these stakeholders are being engaged together. The aim of this scoping review was to explore methods of active stakeholder engagement with multiple levels of stakeholders in cancer-related studies.
methodsThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Articles were included for analysis if they included, at least, two levels of stakeholders who were involved in active stakeholder engagement and originated from the Western countries. There were no restrictions on the date of publication, language, or study design.
resultsOne hundred and seventy-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Most articles originated from the United States, were published between 2020 and 17 June 2026, and the topic was not related to any specific cancer type. The micro- and meso-level stakeholder combination was most frequently reported, and 58.4% of studies described stakeholders being engaged together. Interviews, focus groups, and committees were the most commonly reported engagement activities.
conclusionsMacro-level stakeholders may not be engaged due to the possibility of power imbalances with micro- and meso-level stakeholders. There was great variation in the way stakeholder engagement activities were described, highlighting a need to negotiate terminology.
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.