Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 635

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Participatory research maximises community and lay involvement

Open access
Macaulay, A. C, Commanda, L. E, Freeman, W. L, Gibson, N., McCabe, M. L, Robbins, C. M, Twohig, P. L·1999·BMJ

Abstract

Participatory research attempts to negotiate a balance between developing valid generalisable knowledge and benefiting the community that is being researched and to improve research protocols by incorporating the knowledge and expertise of community members. For many types of research in specific communities, these goals can best be met by the community and researcher collaborating in the research as equals. #### Summary points The knowledge, expertise, and resources of the involved community are often key to successful research Three primary features of participatory research include collaboration, mutual education, and acting on results developed from research questions that are relevant to the community Participatory research is based on a mutually respectful partnership between researchers and communities Partnerships are strengthened by joint development of research agreements for the design, implementation, analysis, and dissemination of results Results of participatory research both have local applicability and are transferable to other communities This integrative review is based on a search of medical, nursing, and social science databases and ethical research codes. The material selected had to be significant theoretical works, source documents, or concrete examples of participatory research. We assessed the texts on the basis of our own experiences as members of Native communities (LEC, MLMcC, CMR) and researchers (WLF, NG, ACM, MLMcC, PLT) in participatory research projects. The preliminary draft was reviewed by a wide range of researchers and community members. The members of the North American Primary Care Research Group reviewed and accepted the final draft as a ploicy statement for participatory research This article summarises that document (the full document can be found at http://views.vcu.edu/views/fap/napcrg98/exec.html). Participatory research began as a movement for social justice in international development settings.1 It was developed to help improve social and economic conditions, to effect change, and to reduce the distrust of the people being studied.2 Although different …

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.774

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 635

Metadata

Authors
Macaulay, A. C., Commanda, L. E., Freeman, W. L., Gibson, N., McCabe, M. L., Robbins, C. M., & Twohig, P. L.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1999-09-18
Volume
319
Issue
7212
Pages
774-778
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2006278611
Cited by
635
References
2
FWCI
33.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Participatory research maximises community and lay involvement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.319.7212.774
The paper
Macaulay, A. C., Commanda, L. E., Freeman, W. L., Gibson, N., McCabe, M. L., Robbins, C. M., & Twohig, P. L. (1999). Participatory research maximises community and lay involvement. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.319.7212.774

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.