Cited by 471Community Health and DevelopmentChildren's Rights and ParticipationParticipatory Visual Research Methods

Youth as Partners, Participants or Passive Recipients: A Review of Children and Adolescents in Community‐Based Participatory Research (CBPR)

Jacquez, Farrah, Vaughn, Lisa M., Wagner, Erin·2013·American Journal of Community Psychology

Abstract

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an orientation to research that places value on equitable collaborations between community members and academic partners, reflecting shared decision making throughout the research process. Although CBPR has become increasingly popular for research with adults, youth are less likely to be included as partners. In our review of the literature, we identified 399 articles described by author or MeSH keyword as CBPR related to youth. We analyzed each study to determine youth engagement. Not including misclassified articles, 27 % of percent of studies were community-placed but lacked a community partnership and/or participatory component. Only 56 (15 %) partnered with youth in some phase of the research process. Although youth were most commonly involved in identifying research questions/priorities and in designing/conducting research, most youth-partnered projects included children or adolescents in several phases of the research process. We outline content, methodology, phases of youth partnership, and age of participating youth in each CBPR with youth project, provide exemplars of CBPR with youth, and discuss the state of the youth-partnered research literature.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10464-012-9533-7

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Findings generated from CBPR are collaborative and therefore more culturally relevant to those involved.

    “Findings generated from CBPR are collaborative and therefore more culturally relevant to those involved (Atalay, 2012; Jacquez, Vaughn, & Wagner, 2013).”

    From Addressing the need for indigenous and decolonized quantitative research methods in Canada (2021) · cites this paper as Jacquez, Vaughn, & Wagner, 2013

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 99 · Cited by 471

Authors
Jacquez, F., Vaughn, L. M., & Wagner, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Cincinnati (US)
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Jacquez, Farrah
Venue
American Journal of Community Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-06-21
Volume
51
Issue
1-2
Pages
176-189
ISSN
  • 0091-0562 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2770
OpenAlex
W2050646317
Cited by
471
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Community Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000077)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Children's Rights and Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Participatory Visual Research Methods
Keywords
community-based participatory research, youth participation, children and adolescents, university-community collaboration, shared decision-making, research design, research priorities
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Community-Based Participatory Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review