Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23006055›Full record

ArticleThe patient2012

Qualitative approaches to understanding patient preferences.

Rachael Gooberman-Hill

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The patient, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Research letter: Impact of pruritus on quality of life-A systematic review.Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Heterogeneity in preferences for outcomes of integrated care for persons with multiple chronic diseases: a latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachael Gooberman-HillSchool of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital, Wesbury-on-Trym, Bristol, UK.
University of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Achieving patient-centered care depends on a thorough understanding of patient preferences at all stages of their journeys through healthcare. Qualitative research methods provide the means to systematically collect and analyze these preferences. Qualitative approaches to research are diverse in character, but many such approaches have a long history and strong disciplinary roots. Despite variation, most qualitative approaches work inductively from the 'ground up', and seek to build knowledge and understanding rather than test hypotheses. Their use to explore patient pathways through care has offered insight into reasons why people become patients in the first instance, their preferences for treatment options and degree of involvement in decisions, and their preferences for healthcare delivery. Qualitative approaches are sometimes used alongside 'quantitative' in mixed methods designs, requiring solid expertise and resourcing. Expertise is also crucial in the assessment of quality in qualitative research, and efforts to develop checklists to assess quality are challenged by evidence about the importance of expertise-based judgments. Recent developments in health research include an upsurge in patient involvement activities in design of research and healthcare services; these may seem similar to qualitative research, but are in fact very different. While an important part of the research landscape, patient involvement activities are not intended to provide robust research-based evidence about patients' preferences or experiences. There is pressing need to bridge the gap between qualitative research evidence and patient involvement in the design of research and services. Participatory research methods that harness qualitative approaches may be a way to achieve this.

Indexed as

Patient PreferenceQualitative ResearchResearch DesignChecklistData CollectionHealth Services ResearchHumansPatient-Centered Care

Identifiers

PMID23006055
OpenAlexW2086315140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.