Conceptualising, operationalising, and measuring trust in participatory health research networks: a scoping review.

Community participation Community-based participatory research Patient participation Review Social networking Trust

Journal

Systematic reviews
ISSN: 2046-4053
Titre abrégé: Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580575

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 03 2022
Historique:
received: 04 12 2020
accepted: 22 02 2022
entrez: 7 3 2022
pubmed: 8 3 2022
medline: 3 5 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

There are many 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 discusses 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 to systematically review and synthesize the literature exploring how trust is conceptualised, operationalised, and measured in CBPR and social networks. This review follows the guidance and framework of Peters et al. which is underpinned by the widely used framework of Levac and colleagues. Levac and colleagues provided enhancements to the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley. We explored several electronic databases including Scopus, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and PsychINFO. A search strategy was identified and agreed upon by the team in conjunction with a research librarian. Two independent reviewers screened articles by title and abstract, then by full-text based on pre-determined exclusion/inclusion criteria. A third reviewer arbitrated discrepancies regarding inclusions/exclusions. A thematic analysis was then conducted to identify relevant themes and sub-themes. Based on the 26 extracted references, several key themes and sub-themes were identified which highlighted the complexity and multidimensionality of trust as a concept. Our analysis revealed an additional emergent category that highlighted another important dimension of trust-outcomes pertaining to trust. Further, variation within how the studies conceptualised, operationalised, and measured trust was illuminated. Finally, the multidimensionality of trust provided important insight into how trust operates as a context, mechanism, and outcome. Findings provide support for future research to incorporate trust as a lens to explore the social-relational aspects of partnerships and the scope to develop interventions to support trust in partnerships.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
There are many 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 discusses 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 to systematically review and synthesize the literature exploring how trust is conceptualised, operationalised, and measured in CBPR and social networks.
METHODS
This review follows the guidance and framework of Peters et al. which is underpinned by the widely used framework of Levac and colleagues. Levac and colleagues provided enhancements to the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley. We explored several electronic databases including Scopus, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and PsychINFO. A search strategy was identified and agreed upon by the team in conjunction with a research librarian. Two independent reviewers screened articles by title and abstract, then by full-text based on pre-determined exclusion/inclusion criteria. A third reviewer arbitrated discrepancies regarding inclusions/exclusions. A thematic analysis was then conducted to identify relevant themes and sub-themes.
RESULTS
Based on the 26 extracted references, several key themes and sub-themes were identified which highlighted the complexity and multidimensionality of trust as a concept. Our analysis revealed an additional emergent category that highlighted another important dimension of trust-outcomes pertaining to trust. Further, variation within how the studies conceptualised, operationalised, and measured trust was illuminated. Finally, the multidimensionality of trust provided important insight into how trust operates as a context, mechanism, and outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
Findings provide support for future research to incorporate trust as a lens to explore the social-relational aspects of partnerships and the scope to develop interventions to support trust in partnerships.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35249553
doi: 10.1186/s13643-022-01910-x
pii: 10.1186/s13643-022-01910-x
pmc: PMC8900447
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

40

Subventions

Organisme : CIHR
ID : 143237
Pays : Canada

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s).

Références

Eval Program Plann. 2018 Feb;66:70-78
pubmed: 29053983
Eval Program Plann. 2019 Apr;73:116-128
pubmed: 30583063
BMC Public Health. 2015 Jul 30;15:725
pubmed: 26223523
Am J Public Health. 2010 Apr 1;100 Suppl 1:S40-6
pubmed: 20147663
BMJ Open. 2018 Aug 10;8(8):e021245
pubmed: 30099392
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016 Oct 26;6(6):327-338
pubmed: 28812825
Am J Public Health. 2010 Jul;100(7):1319-25
pubmed: 20466964
Health Educ Behav. 2019 Oct;46(1_suppl):19S-32S
pubmed: 31549557
Milbank Q. 2012 Jun;90(2):311-46
pubmed: 22709390
BMC Public Health. 2016 Jul 13;16:566
pubmed: 27411474
Health Promot Pract. 2017 Nov;18(6):833-853
pubmed: 29039710
J Appl Psychol. 2006 Jul;91(4):870-83
pubmed: 16834511
Annu Rev Public Health. 2008;29:325-50
pubmed: 18173388
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Feb 18;13:64
pubmed: 23414561
Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 19;6(1):263
pubmed: 29258593
Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334-40
pubmed: 10940958
Fam Pract. 2017 Jun 1;34(3):305-312
pubmed: 28334748
BMJ Open. 2020 Oct 29;10(10):e038840
pubmed: 33122318
Implement Sci. 2010 Sep 20;5:69
pubmed: 20854677
Ann Anthropol Pract. 2011 Nov 1;35(2):
pubmed: 24363957
J Mix Methods Res. 2018 Jan;12(1):55-74
pubmed: 29230152
Biomed Res Int. 2018 Apr 24;2018:7281405
pubmed: 29854784

Auteurs

Meghan Gilfoyle (M)

Public & Patient Involvement Research Unit, School of Medicine and Health Research Institute (HRI), University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland, V94 T9PX.

Anne MacFarlane (A)

Public & Patient Involvement Research Unit, School of Medicine and Health Research Institute (HRI), University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland, V94 T9PX.

Jon Salsberg (J)

Public & Patient Involvement Research Unit, School of Medicine and Health Research Institute (HRI), University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland, V94 T9PX. Jon.Salsberg@ul.ie.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH