Cargando…
Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol
INTRODUCTION: A participatory approach to co-creating new knowledge in health research has gained significant momentum in recent decades. This is founded on the described benefits of community-based participatory research (CBPR), such as increased relevance of research for those who must act on its...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597520/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33122318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038840 |
_version_ | 1783602379582603264 |
---|---|
author | Gilfoyle, Meghan MacFarlane, Anne Salsberg, Jon |
author_facet | Gilfoyle, Meghan MacFarlane, Anne Salsberg, Jon |
author_sort | Gilfoyle, Meghan |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: A participatory approach to co-creating new knowledge in health research has gained significant momentum in recent decades. This is founded on the described benefits of community-based participatory research (CBPR), such as increased relevance of research for those who must act on its findings. This has prompted researchers to better understand how CBPR functions to achieve these benefits through building sustainable research partnerships. Several studies have identified ‘trust’ as a key mechanism to achieve sustainable partnerships, which themselves constitute social networks. Although existing literature discuss trust and CBPR, or trust and social networks, preliminary searches reveal that none link all three concepts of trust, CBPR and social networks. Thus, we present our scoping review protocol to systematically review and synthesise the literature exploring how trust is conceptualised, operationalised and measured in CBPR and social networks. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol follows guidelines from Levac et al (Scoping studies: advancing themethodology. Implement Sci 2010;5:69), which follow the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley. This scoping review explores several electronic databases including Scopus, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and PsychINFO. Grey literature such as theses/dissertations and reports will be included. A search strategy was identified and agreed on by the team in conjunction with a research librarian. Two independent reviewers will screen articles by title and abstract, then by full text based on pre-determined exclusion/inclusion criteria. A third reviewer will arbitrate discrepancies regarding inclusions/exclusions. We plan to incorporate a thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics is not required for this review specifically. It is a component of a larger study that received ethical approval from the University of Limerick research ethics committee (#2018_05_12_EHS). Translation of results to key domains is integrated through active collaboration of stakeholders from community, health services and academic sectors. Findings will be disseminated through academic conferences, and peer review publications targeting public and patient involvement in health research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7597520 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75975202020-11-05 Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol Gilfoyle, Meghan MacFarlane, Anne Salsberg, Jon BMJ Open Public Health INTRODUCTION: A participatory approach to co-creating new knowledge in health research has gained significant momentum in recent decades. This is founded on the described benefits of community-based participatory research (CBPR), such as increased relevance of research for those who must act on its findings. This has prompted researchers to better understand how CBPR functions to achieve these benefits through building sustainable research partnerships. Several studies have identified ‘trust’ as a key mechanism to achieve sustainable partnerships, which themselves constitute social networks. Although existing literature discuss trust and CBPR, or trust and social networks, preliminary searches reveal that none link all three concepts of trust, CBPR and social networks. Thus, we present our scoping review protocol to systematically review and synthesise the literature exploring how trust is conceptualised, operationalised and measured in CBPR and social networks. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol follows guidelines from Levac et al (Scoping studies: advancing themethodology. Implement Sci 2010;5:69), which follow the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley. This scoping review explores several electronic databases including Scopus, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and PsychINFO. Grey literature such as theses/dissertations and reports will be included. A search strategy was identified and agreed on by the team in conjunction with a research librarian. Two independent reviewers will screen articles by title and abstract, then by full text based on pre-determined exclusion/inclusion criteria. A third reviewer will arbitrate discrepancies regarding inclusions/exclusions. We plan to incorporate a thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics is not required for this review specifically. It is a component of a larger study that received ethical approval from the University of Limerick research ethics committee (#2018_05_12_EHS). Translation of results to key domains is integrated through active collaboration of stakeholders from community, health services and academic sectors. Findings will be disseminated through academic conferences, and peer review publications targeting public and patient involvement in health research. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-10-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7597520/ /pubmed/33122318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038840 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Public Health Gilfoyle, Meghan MacFarlane, Anne Salsberg, Jon Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol |
title | Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol |
title_full | Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol |
title_fullStr | Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol |
title_short | Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol |
title_sort | conceptualising, operationalising and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review protocol |
topic | Public Health |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597520/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33122318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038840 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gilfoylemeghan conceptualisingoperationalisingandmeasuringtrustinparticipatoryhealthresearchnetworksascopingreviewprotocol AT macfarlaneanne conceptualisingoperationalisingandmeasuringtrustinparticipatoryhealthresearchnetworksascopingreviewprotocol AT salsbergjon conceptualisingoperationalisingandmeasuringtrustinparticipatoryhealthresearchnetworksascopingreviewprotocol |