Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23975104›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2013

Facilitating and inhibiting factors for long-term involvement of patients at outcome conferences--lessons learnt from a decade of collaboration in OMERACT: a qualitative study.

Maarten de Wit, Tineke Abma, Marije Koelewijn-Van Loon, Sarah Collins, John Kirwan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Benefits of Patient Involvement for Translational Research.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2017
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Establishing the values for patient engagement (PE) in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) research: an international, multiple-stakeholder perspective.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

5 authors.

Maarten de WitMetamedica, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tineke Abma
Marije Koelewijn-Van Loon
Sarah Collins
John Kirwan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSeveral studies have provided insights into the conditions for successful patient involvement in health research. We recently demonstrated that long-term engagement with people with rheumatic conditions in international outcome research led to significant changes in the research agenda in the field of rheumatology. This article explores facilitating and inhibiting factors for long-term involvement of patients as collaborative partners at five Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) conferences.

designResponsive evaluation, starting with a thematic document analysis of conference proceedings and the grey literature, followed by 38 qualitative interviews. Interview transcripts were subjected to inductive content analysis.

setting5 international OMERACT conferences between 2002 and 2012.

participantsPatient delegates (n=16) and professional delegates representing researchers (n=14), pharmaceutical industry and regulators (n=2).

resultsCombined review of the document analysis and interview data revealed five main facilitators and three main barriers. Patient engagement as full participants at OMERACT conferences was enhanced by: strong leadership commitment and the presence of change agents, a clear selection procedure, an inclusive consensus-based conference design, individualised and self-organised support, an interactive and encouraging moderation style during discussion groups. Barriers were related to the intensity of the conference programme, scepticism among researchers and doubts about the representativeness of the patient group.

conclusionsThis study concludes that developing a sustainable structure for funding, selection and support of patient delegates, as well as adjusting conference design and moderation style, contributes not only towards facilitating direct dialogue between all stakeholders but also towards enhancing mutual understanding and the successful incorporation of the patient perspective in an outcome conference such as OMERACT.

Indexed as

Qualitative ResearchRheumatologySocial Medicine

Identifiers

PMID23975104
PMCPMC3753501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.