Why English? | Reporting CEnR Peer-Reviewed Community-Engaged Research Through Partnership Roles, Power, Procedures, Interpretation and Community Return

ORIENTATION

What this guide covers

Current fact check

The official CEnR record cites a scoping review that found inconsistent descriptions of community engagement in behavioural-medicine publications and calls for clear publishing guidance. The project is under development; it does not yet provide final items. Its core reader job is to help a peer-reviewed publication reveal enough engagement procedure for editors and readers to judge what happened.

What this guide does not cover

This article focuses on how peer-reviewed empirical papers report community-engaged research procedures. It does not certify that a partnership was equitable, replace ethics or study-design reporting, turn consultation into co-leadership, or merge all patient, public and community involvement frameworks into one.

Worked example

Every chapter returns to a fictional school-neighbourhood study in which youth, families, educators and community organisations co-design research on safe routes to evening learning programmes. It is fictional, low-stakes and educational; it does not report a real school, clinical decision or guaranteed outcome.

Warm up with eduKate’s guides to explaining scientific evidence and asking better questions in class.

CHAPTER 1 OF 14

1. Define the Community and Engagement Approach

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Describe who the community is, internal diversity, place or issue, relationship to the study and the term used for engagement.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Describe who the community is, internal diversity, place or issue, relationship to the study and the term used for engagement. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Youth, families, programme staff and neighbourhood groups are reported as distinct partners. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Any boundary can omit people affected by the research. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Define the Community and Engagement Approach”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 2 OF 14

2. Explain Partnership History and Entry

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Report prior relationships, who initiated contact, invitations, intermediaries, refusals, trust-building and changes before funding.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Report prior relationships, who initiated contact, invitations, intermediaries, refusals, trust-building and changes before funding. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: The paper distinguishes a long-standing youth partnership from organisations invited for this study. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Visible organisations may not represent less-connected residents. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Explain Partnership History and Entry”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 3 OF 14

3. State Why Engagement Was Methodologically Needed

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Connect engagement to question selection, ethics, recruitment, measures, interpretation, implementation or community benefit.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Connect engagement to question selection, ethics, recruitment, measures, interpretation, implementation or community benefit. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Youth experience changes the study’s route definitions and interview times. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

A persuasive rationale does not prove meaningful influence. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “State Why Engagement Was Methodologically Needed”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 4 OF 14

4. Name Partners, Representation and Recruitment

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Explain who participated, selection, eligibility, constituencies, turnover, attendance, missing voices and limits of representation.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Explain who participated, selection, eligibility, constituencies, turnover, attendance, missing voices and limits of representation. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: The paper reports how youth advisers were recruited and who could not join evening meetings. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

No panel represents a whole community automatically. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Name Partners, Representation and Recruitment”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 5 OF 14

5. Report Roles and Decision Authority by Stage

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Show who shaped questions, design, instruments, recruitment, data collection, analysis, dissemination and follow-up, including final authority.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Show who shaped questions, design, instruments, recruitment, data collection, analysis, dissemination and follow-up, including final authority. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: A stage-by-stage table shows which decisions required joint approval. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Nominal roles can differ from actual influence. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Report Roles and Decision Authority by Stage”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 6 OF 14

6. Describe Power Sharing and Governance

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Report committees, voting or consensus, vetoes, chairing, access to information, conflict procedures and accountability.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Report committees, voting or consensus, vetoes, chairing, access to information, conflict procedures and accountability. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Youth partners can reject unsafe recruitment language and request documented reconsideration. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Formal equality can coexist with unequal expertise or institutional control. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Describe Power Sharing and Governance”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 7 OF 14

7. Report Resources, Compensation and Accessibility

Back to contents

Why this move matters

State funding control, payment rates or non-payment, childcare, transport, interpretation, digital access, scheduling and support.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

State funding control, payment rates or non-payment, childcare, transport, interpretation, digital access, scheduling and support. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Partners receive transparent compensation and transport support without losing decision rights. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Payment may interact with benefits, employment or local norms. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Report Resources, Compensation and Accessibility”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 8 OF 14

8. Document Disagreement, Adaptation and Departures

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Describe conflicts, contested choices, revisions, unresolved issues, withdrawals and how reasons were recorded.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Describe conflicts, contested choices, revisions, unresolved issues, withdrawals and how reasons were recorded. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: A proposed survey item is removed after community partners explain its stigma risk. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Not every disagreement can be safely described in detail. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Document Disagreement, Adaptation and Departures”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 9 OF 14

9. Explain Community Roles in Data Collection and Stewardship

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Report training, employment, consent interactions, access, ownership, custody, privacy and reuse decisions.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Report training, employment, consent interactions, access, ownership, custody, privacy and reuse decisions. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Community researchers collect interviews under agreed confidentiality and data-access rules. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Local familiarity can help rapport while increasing identifiability. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Explain Community Roles in Data Collection and Stewardship”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 10 OF 14

10. Trace Community Interpretation of Findings

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Show who joined coding, theme development, statistical interpretation, sense-making, member reflection and decisions about uncertainty.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Show who joined coding, theme development, statistical interpretation, sense-making, member reflection and decisions about uncertainty. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Youth partners challenge an academic interpretation that frames cautious travel as disengagement. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Agreement does not guarantee validity, and disagreement should not be forced away. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Trace Community Interpretation of Findings”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 11 OF 14

11. Report Authorship, Acknowledgement and Publication Review

Back to contents

Why this move matters

State authorship criteria, writing support, name preferences, contribution statements, manuscript review, publication control and non-author reasons.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

State authorship criteria, writing support, name preferences, contribution statements, manuscript review, publication control and non-author reasons. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Community authors review the final paper and are credited for governance and interpretation, not merely recruitment. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Journal conventions can create barriers to authorship. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Report Authorship, Acknowledgement and Publication Review”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 12 OF 14

12. Describe Return of Results and Community-Facing Outputs

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Report audience, format, language, accessibility, timing, dialogue, correction and what happens before or after journal publication.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Report audience, format, language, accessibility, timing, dialogue, correction and what happens before or after journal publication. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: Results return through a youth workshop and public route map before the journal article closes the project. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Dissemination alone does not guarantee usefulness or benefit. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Describe Return of Results and Community-Facing Outputs”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 13 OF 14

13. Report Benefits, Burdens and Continuing Accountability

Back to contents

Why this move matters

Describe intended and observed benefits, harms, capacity, opportunity costs, commitments, contact routes and post-study responsibilities.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

Describe intended and observed benefits, harms, capacity, opportunity costs, commitments, contact routes and post-study responsibilities. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: The partnership tracks whether recommended safety changes were considered and explains what remains outside its authority. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Benefits may emerge slowly or fall outside the study period. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Report Benefits, Burdens and Continuing Accountability”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

CHAPTER 14 OF 14

14. Conclude With a Bounded Publication Claim

Back to contents

Why this move matters

State what engagement occurred, what it changed, whose perspectives remain missing, what can be adapted and which judgements require further evidence.

Make the partnership visible in the publication

State what engagement occurred, what it changed, whose perspectives remain missing, what can be adapted and which judgements require further evidence. Report the actors, relationship, decision, resource, procedure and consequence in ordinary sentences. A journal reader should be able to see where community expertise changed the research rather than meeting a decorative label.

Trace one decision through peer review

Worked example: The paper claims a documented co-design process in one neighbourhood, not universal representation or guaranteed impact. Preserve the original concern, discussion, revision, authority, implementation and review. Identify what is published in the main text, supplement, contributorship statement or community-facing output.

Keep publication transparency separate from partnership quality

A complete report can reveal an unequal or weak partnership; it does not make that partnership ethical by itself. Conversely, a respectful collaboration can still be impossible to assess if roles, power and changes are omitted.

Respect the neighbouring-guide boundary

Transparent reporting can expose weaknesses but cannot repair them retrospectively. CEnR was registered on 3 November 2026 and is under development. RAPPORT, CORE, GRIPP2 and study-design guidance have related but non-identical jobs; this article does not merge them.

Student, parent and career transfer

Make one evidence card for “Conclude With a Bounded Publication Claim”: source location, plain-language meaning, limit and next question. A parent or teacher can ask for one everyday explanation and one specialist explanation; both must preserve the same conditions. This habit supports community research, public health, education, social work, urban planning, policy, evaluation, non-profit leadership, journal editing, ethics, participatory design and research communication without promising a grade, admission, funding decision or job.

PRACTICE LAB

Build a CEnR decision trail

Student route

1. Choose one original report inside this guide’s scope.
2. Copy its objective and underline actor, action, context, evidence and intended decision.
3. Draw the specific reasoning chain used in this article.
4. Mark each step reported, inferred, contested or unknown.
5. Rewrite the conclusion so it preserves the narrowest important limitation.

Parent or teacher route

Ask the learner to explain how English helps us make community engagement legible inside a peer-reviewed paper from partnership formation and shared decisions to analysis, authorship, accountability and return twice: once to a classmate and once to a method specialist. Praise a precise correction and a well-stated unknown; both show disciplined attention to evidence.

Early-career route

Create a one-page CEnR audit with source link, date checked, scope, method logic, decisive wording, contrary evidence, limit and next action. A colleague should be able to continue without guessing.

Continue with eduKate’s guides to reading course and career information and giving useful feedback in group projects.

USEFUL NEXT READING

Continue with a related guide

Read the RAPPORT community-engaged research guide for a related but different reader job. Return here when the question is specifically how to make community engagement legible inside a peer-reviewed paper from partnership formation and shared decisions to analysis, authorship, accountability and return. Use the linked guide for its separate reader task, and this guide for the question defined here.

For English practice across research, school and career communication, visit the Singapore English Tuition Centre learning site.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Questions students and parents often ask

Is CEnR final?

No. EQUATOR lists the peer-review publication guideline as under development after registration on 3 November 2026.

How is this different from RAPPORT?

CEnR focuses on what peer-reviewed publications reveal about engagement procedures; RAPPORT has a broader rigor-and-reproducibility framing.

Does community consultation equal co-leadership?

No. Roles and decision authority must be reported rather than inferred from a label.

Why report compensation?

Resources affect who can participate, for how long and with what burden.

Must every community partner be an author?

Not automatically. Authorship criteria, support, contribution and acknowledgement decisions should be transparent.

Does complete reporting prove the partnership was equitable?

No. It enables judgement but does not itself create equity.