Characterizing research partnerships in child health research: A scoping review.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING Journal of Child Health Care Pub Date : 2024-02-06 DOI:10.1177/13674935241231346
Leah K Crockett, Shannon D Scott, S Michelle Driedger, Masood Khan, Devashree Prabhu, Nicole Askin, Dawn Steliga, Olivia Tefft, Ann Jansson, Sarah Turner, Kathryn M Sibley
{"title":"Characterizing research partnerships in child health research: A scoping review.","authors":"Leah K Crockett, Shannon D Scott, S Michelle Driedger, Masood Khan, Devashree Prabhu, Nicole Askin, Dawn Steliga, Olivia Tefft, Ann Jansson, Sarah Turner, Kathryn M Sibley","doi":"10.1177/13674935241231346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research partnerships between researchers and knowledge users (KUs) in child health are understudied. This study examined the scope of KU engagement reported in published child health research, inclusive of health research partnership approaches and KU groups. Search strategies were developed by a health research librarian. Studies had to be in English, published since 2007, and were not excluded based on design. A two-step, multiple-person hybrid screening approach was used for study inclusion. Data on study and engagement characteristics, barriers and facilitators, and effects were extracted by one reviewer, with 10% verified by a second reviewer. Three hundred fifteen articles were included, with 243 (77.1%) published between 2019 and 2021. Community-based participatory research was the most common approach used (<i>n</i> = 122, 38.3%). Most studies (<i>n</i> = 235, 74.6%) engaged multiple KU groups (range 1-11), with children/youth, healthcare professionals, and parents/families being most frequently engaged. Reporting of barriers and facilitators and effects were variable, reported in 170 (53.8%) and 197 (62.5%) studies, respectively. Publications have increased exponentially over time. There is ongoing need to optimize evaluation and reporting consistency to facilitate growth in the field. Additional studies are needed to further our understanding of research partnerships in child health.</p>","PeriodicalId":54388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Child Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13674935241231346","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research partnerships between researchers and knowledge users (KUs) in child health are understudied. This study examined the scope of KU engagement reported in published child health research, inclusive of health research partnership approaches and KU groups. Search strategies were developed by a health research librarian. Studies had to be in English, published since 2007, and were not excluded based on design. A two-step, multiple-person hybrid screening approach was used for study inclusion. Data on study and engagement characteristics, barriers and facilitators, and effects were extracted by one reviewer, with 10% verified by a second reviewer. Three hundred fifteen articles were included, with 243 (77.1%) published between 2019 and 2021. Community-based participatory research was the most common approach used (n = 122, 38.3%). Most studies (n = 235, 74.6%) engaged multiple KU groups (range 1-11), with children/youth, healthcare professionals, and parents/families being most frequently engaged. Reporting of barriers and facilitators and effects were variable, reported in 170 (53.8%) and 197 (62.5%) studies, respectively. Publications have increased exponentially over time. There is ongoing need to optimize evaluation and reporting consistency to facilitate growth in the field. Additional studies are needed to further our understanding of research partnerships in child health.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童健康研究中研究伙伴关系的特点:范围审查。
对儿童健康领域研究人员与知识使用者(KUs)之间的研究合作关系研究不足。本研究考察了已发表的儿童健康研究中报告的知识用户参与范围,包括健康研究合作方式和知识用户群体。搜索策略由一名健康研究图书管理员制定。研究必须是英文的,自 2007 年以来发表,且不排除设计方面的原因。在纳入研究时采用了两步、多人混合筛选法。研究和参与特征、障碍和促进因素以及效果等方面的数据由一名审稿人提取,10% 的数据由第二名审稿人核实。共纳入 315 篇文章,其中 243 篇(77.1%)发表于 2019 年至 2021 年之间。基于社区的参与式研究是最常用的方法(n = 122,38.3%)。大多数研究(n = 235,占 74.6%)涉及多个 KU 群体(范围在 1-11 之间),其中儿童/青少年、医疗保健专业人员和父母/家庭参与最多。关于障碍、促进因素和效果的报告各不相同,分别有 170 项(53.8%)和 197 项(62.5%)研究进行了报告。随着时间的推移,发表的文章成倍增加。目前需要优化评估和报告的一致性,以促进该领域的发展。我们需要开展更多的研究,以进一步了解儿童健康研究伙伴关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Child Health Care
Journal of Child Health Care NURSING-PEDIATRICS
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
15.80%
发文量
60
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Child Health Care is a broad ranging, international, professionally-oriented, interdisciplinary and peer reviewed journal. It focuses on issues related to the health and health care of neonates, children, young people and their families, including areas such as illness, disability, complex needs, well-being, quality of life and mental health care in a diverse range of settings. The Journal of Child Health Care publishes original theoretical, empirical and review papers which have application to a wide variety of disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Why are we still doing sucrose trials for newborns? Experiences of siblings and parents of children with congenital heart disease and exploration of siblings' support needs. Mothers' experience seeking healthcare advice for their unsettled infants in Victoria, Australia. Factors that support children and young people to express their views and to have them heard in healthcare: An inductive qualitative content analysis. Goals of Morbidity and Mortality meetings in paediatric acute care. A qualitative case study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1