Suchergebnisse

Research projects involving science shops and citizen science in their promotion of participatory approaches are flourishing globally. However, an instrument evaluating the impacts of such approaches at different stages of a participatory research processes has yet to be validated. The InSPIRES H2020 project developed an impact evaluation tool for just this purpose, consisting of 64 items that reflect upon the dimensions of knowledge democracy, citizen-led research, participatory dynamics, transformative change, and integrity. In this article, we seek to test the content validity of this tool and to provide recommendations that can ensure its validity. A panel of nine experts was created to evaluate each item as regards the following three criteria: representativeness, relevance, and clarity. The Aiken's V and Wilson Score methods were used to assess the tool's content validity based on the experts' ratings. Experts' written comments were also reviewed. At the panel level, 75% of the items were considered satisfactory in relation to each of the three validity criteria. However, at the population level, 72% of the items suggested that parts of the tool were not valid and required revision. The main suggestions from the experts pointed to the need to reformulate items in which the separation between science and society appeared reinforced and to develop more items about the gender perspective of a research project. The revised version of the tool should serve as a well-founded, comprehensive evaluation instrument for on-going and future projects whose goal is to self-reflect and compare participatory research processes.

Research projects involving science shops and citizen science in their promotion of participatory approaches are flourishing globally. However, an instrument evaluating the impacts of such approaches at different stages of a participatory research processes has yet to be validated. The InSPIRES H2020 project developed an impact evaluation tool for just this purpose, consisting of 64 items that reflect upon the dimensions of knowledge democracy, citizen-led research, participatory dynamics, transformative change, and integrity. In this article, we seek to test the content validity of this tool and to provide recommendations that can ensure its validity. A panel of nine experts was created to evaluate each item as regards the following three criteria: representativeness, relevance, and clarity. The Aiken's V and Wilson Score methods were used to assess the tool's content validity based on the experts' ratings. Experts' written comments were also reviewed. At the panel level, 75% of the items were considered satisfactory in relation to each of the three validity criteria. However, at the population level, 72% of the items suggested that parts of the tool were not valid and required revision. The main suggestions from the experts pointed to the need to reformulate items in which the separation between science and society appeared reinforced and to develop more items about the gender perspective of a research project. The revised version of the tool should serve as a well-founded, comprehensive evaluation instrument for on-going and future projects whose goal is to self-reflect and compare participatory research processes. ; This work was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [under grant agreement No 741677]. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Undertaking citizen science research in Public Health involving human subjects poses significant challenges concerning the traditional process of ethical approval. It requires an extension of the ethics of protection of research subjects in order to include the empowerment of citizens as citizen scientists. This paper investigates these challenges and illustrates the ethical framework and the strategies developed within the CitieS-Health project. It also proposes first recommendations generated from the experiences of five citizen science pilot studies in environmental epidemiology within this project. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 824484. This publication reflects only the authors' view. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.

Several citizen science (CS) initiatives have been adopted in environmental science to monitor air and noise pollution, and water quality related to civic concerns. Nevertheless, CS projects in environmental epidemiology remain scarce. This is because little attention has been paid to evaluate associations of environmental exposures with health effects directly. This narrative review aims to promote the understanding and application of CS in environmental epidemiology. There are many commonalities between CS and other participatory approaches in environmental epidemiology. Yet, CS can foster the democratization of scientific governance and enhance the sustainability of research projects more effectively than other existing participatory approaches. This is especially the case in projects where citizens are invited to participate, engage and become involved throughout all the phases of a research project (co-created projects). This paper identifies various challenges and opportunities specific to the implementation of co-created CS projects in environmental epidemiology. The development of more locally relevant research designs, using local knowledge, obtaining medical ethical clearance, and co-analysing the association between exposure and health, are examples of opportunities and challenges that require epidemiologists to go beyond the traditional research framework and include more outreach activities. Continued efforts, particularly the sharing of information about projects' collaborative processes, are needed to make CS a more concrete and cohesive approach in environmental epidemiology.

Article Number: 106470 ; Several citizen science (CS) initiatives have been adopted in environmental science to monitor air and noise pollution, and water quality related to civic concerns. Nevertheless, CS projects in environmental epidemiology remain scarce. This is because little attention has been paid to evaluate associations of environmental exposures with health effects directly. This narrative review aims to promote the understanding and application of CS in environmental epidemiology. There are many commonalities between CS and other participatory approaches in environmental epidemiology. Yet, CS can foster the democratization of scientific governance and enhance the sustainability of research projects more effectively than other existing participatory approaches. This is especially the case in projects where citizens are invited to participate, engage and become involved throughout all the phases of a research project (co-created projects). This paper identifies various challenges and opportunities specific to the implementation of co-created CS projects in environmental epidemiology. The development of more locally relevant research designs, using local knowledge, obtaining medical ethical clearance, and coanalysing the association between exposure and health, are examples of opportunities and challenges that require epidemiologists to go beyond the traditional research framework and include more outreach activities. Continued efforts, particularly the sharing of information about projects? collaborative processes, are needed to make CS a more concrete and cohesive approach in environmental epidemiology ; Aplinkotyros katedra ; Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas

Several citizen science (CS) initiatives have been adopted in environmental science to monitor air and noise pollution, and water quality related to civic concerns. Nevertheless, CS projects in environmental epidemiology remain scarce. This is because little attention has been paid to evaluate associations of environmental exposures with health effects directly. This narrative review aims to promote the understanding and application of CS in environmental epidemiology. There are many commonalities between CS and other participatory approaches in environmental epidemiology. Yet, CS can foster the democratization of scientific governance and enhance the sustainability of research projects more effectively than other existing participatory approaches. This is especially the case in projects where citizens are invited to participate, engage and become involved throughout all the phases of a research project (co-created projects). This paper identifies various challenges and opportunities specific to the implementation of co-created CS projects in environmental epidemiology. The development of more locally relevant research designs, using local knowledge, obtaining medical ethical clearance, and co-analysing the association between exposure and health, are examples of opportunities and challenges that require epidemiologists to go beyond the traditional research framework and include more outreach activities. Continued efforts, particularly the sharing of information about projects' collaborative processes, are needed to make CS a more concrete and cohesive approach in environmental epidemiology. ; This paper has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 824484. The output reflects the authors' view. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made from the information this paper contains. We acknowledge support from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities through the "Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa 2019-2023" Program (CEX2018-000806-S), support from the Generalitat de Catalunya through the CERCA Program, and the support from EXPOSOME-NL (NWO grant number 024.004.017) and EXPANSE (EU-H2020 Grant number 874627).