Cited by 79Community Health and DevelopmentHealth Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance Assessment

Assessing the benefits of participatory research: a rationale for a realist review

Open access
Macaulay, Ann C., Jagosh, Justin, Seller, Robbyn, Henderson, Jim, Cargo, Margaret, Greenhalgh, Trisha, Wong, Geoff, Salsberg, Jon +3 more·2011·Global Health Promotion

Abstract

Participatory research (PR) experts believe that increased community and stakeholder participation in research augments program pertinence, quality, outcome, sustainability, uptake, and transferability. There is, however, a dearth of assessments and measurement tools to demonstrate the contribution of participation in health research and interventions. One systematic review of PR, conducted for the Agency for Health Research and Quality (AHRQ), provided no conclusive evidence concerning the benefits of community participation to enhance research and health outcomes. To overcome methodological gaps and barriers of the AHRQ review, we propose to conduct a systematic realist review, which can be understood as a theory-driven qualitative review capable of capturing the often complex, diffuse and obtuse evidence concerning participation. Reviewing how PR mechanisms and contextual factors mediate and moderate outcomes, the review will generate and test hypotheses (middle-range theories) conceptualizing the benefits of participation and will portray the manner and circumstances in which participation influences outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1757975910383936

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Previous evaluations have failed to use methodologies that take into account PPI's complexity, arising from PPI being an interconnected, multifaceted social process, making it difficult to pinpoint specific impacts and contributions.

    “First, previous evaluations have failed to use methodologies that take into account its complexity, 100 arising from PPI being an interconnected, multifaceted social process, making it difficult to pinpoint specific impacts and contributions.19”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 12 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Macaulay, A. C., Jagosh, J., Seller, R., Henderson, J., Cargo, M., Greenhalgh, T., Wong, G., Salsberg, J., Green, L. W., Herbert, C. P., & Pluye, P.
Affiliations
  • McGill University (CA)
  • University of South Australia (AU)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Macaulay, Ann C.
Venue
Global Health Promotion
Published
2011-05-19
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
45-48
ISSN
  • 1757-9759 (ISSN-L)
  • 1757-9767
OpenAlex
W2044082814
Cited by
79
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
11.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Global Health Promotion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship@McGill (McGill) (submittedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • McGill University
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Keywords
participatory research, community participation, stakeholder engagement, health research, research outcomes, program relevance, sustainability, transferability, realist review, middle-range theory, mediating and moderating effects, health interventions
MeSH terms
Health Promotion, United States, Program Evaluation, United States Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 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