Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19327160›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2009

Introducing patient perspective in health technology assessment at the local level.

Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Dolorès Lepage-Savary, Johanne Gagnon, Michèle St-Pierre, Chantale Simard, Marc Rhainds, Renald Lemieux, François-Pierre Gauvin, Marie Desmartis, France Légaré

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Involving patients in health technology funding decisions: stakeholder perspectives on processes used in Australia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016
    Article
  10. A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015
    Review
  11. Introducing the patient's perspective in hospital health technology assessment (HTA): the views of HTA producers, hospital managers and patients.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2014
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Close to the bench as well as at the bedside: involving service users in all phases of translational research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2012
    Review
  14. A structured approach to knowledge exchange: understanding the implementation of a cancer survivor program.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2012
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Marie-Pierre GagnonQuebec University Hospital Research Centre, Quebec, Canada. marie-pierre.gagnon@fsi.ulaval.ca
Dolorès Lepage-Savary
Johanne Gagnon
Michèle St-Pierre
Chantale Simard
Marc Rhainds
Renald Lemieux
François-Pierre Gauvin
Marie Desmartis
France Légaré

Funding

CIHR 91732
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecognizing the importance of increased patient participation in healthcare decisions leads decision makers to consider effective ways to incorporate patient perspectives in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) processes. The implementation of local health HTA units in university hospitals in Quebec provides a unique opportunity to foster an increased participation of patients in decisions regarding health technologies and clinical interventions. This project explores strategies that could be effective in involving patients in HTA activities at the local level. To do so, three objectives are pursued: 1) To synthesise international knowledge and experiences on patient and public involvement in HTA activities; 2) To explore the perceptions of stakeholders (administrators, clinical managers, healthcare professionals, HTA producers, and patients) regarding strategies for involving patients in various HTA activities; and 3) To produce a consensual strategic framework that could guide interventions for involving patients in HTA activities at the local level.

methodsA systematic review of the literature will be conducted to synthesise international knowledge and experiments regarding the implication of patients and public in HTA. Then, focus groups will be carried out with representatives of various stakeholder groups in order to explore their perceptions regarding patient participation in HTA. Based on findings from the systematic review and the focus groups, a framework to support patient participation in HTA activities will be proposed. It will then be validated during a deliberative meeting with the research team, composed of scientists and decision makers, and representatives from different groups involved in HTA in Quebec. This deliberative meeting will aim at identifying the type and the degree of participation as well as the adequate timing for involving patients in local HTA activities. DISCUSSION: Given the actual state of evidence, integrating patient perspective in HTA activities has the potential to improve the quality of healthcare services. This study provides an opportunity to bridge the gap between HTA producers and its ultimate end-user: the patient. It will provide guidance to support local HTA units in Quebec and elsewhere in their decisions regarding patient participation. The framework developed could be applied to design and implement strategies for involving patients in HTA activities.

Indexed as

ConsensusHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePatient ParticipationEvidence-Based MedicineFocus GroupsHealth Services ResearchHumansQuebecReview Literature as TopicTechnology Assessment, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID19327160
PMCPMC2671501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.