Trial reportImplementation science : IS2014
Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial.
Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 124 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
124 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Methodological procedures for priority setting mental health research: a systematic review summarising the methods, designs and frameworks involved with priority setting.Health research policy and systems · 2023Pooled it
- Consumer engagement in health care policy, research and services: A systematic review and meta-analysis of methods and effects.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Prioritization approaches in the development of health practice guidelines: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2019Pooled it
- Patient, Family, and Community Advisory Councils in Health Care and Research: a Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Priority setting for new systematic reviews: processes and lessons learned in three regions in Africa.BMJ global health · 2019Pooled it
- Patient and public engagement in research and health system decision making: A systematic review of evaluation tools.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018Pooled it
- Community Education and Engagement in Family Planning: Updated Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Engaging patients to improve quality of care: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2018Pooled it
- Patient and public engagement in priority setting: A systematic rapid review of the literature.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Youth experiences of transition from child mental health services to adult mental health services: a qualitative thematic synthesis.BMC psychiatry · 2017Pooled it
- The impact of patient advisors on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2017Pooled it
- Safe and effective person- and family-centered care practices during transitions from hospital to home-A web-based Delphi technique.PloS one · 2019Trial
- A Community Engagement Method to Design Patient Engagement Materials for Cardiovascular Health.Annals of family medicine · 2018Trial
- Public Mistrust of the U.S. Health Care System's Profit Motives: Mixed-Methods Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2017Trial
- Determining the research priorities for patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2017Trial
- Trial
- What are the key ingredients for effective public involvement in health care improvement and policy decisions? A randomized trial process evaluation.The Milbank quarterly · 2014Trial
- Practice Transformation Support and Patient Engagement to Improve Cardiovascular Care: From EvidenceNOW Southwest (ENSW).Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMTrial
- Developing Peer-Mentored Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Adolescents With Mild-To-Borderline Intellectual Disability and Anxiety: A Qualitative Study.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2026Article
64 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients are increasingly seen as active partners in healthcare. While patient involvement in individual clinical decisions has been extensively studied, no trial has assessed how patients can effectively be involved in collective healthcare decisions affecting the population. The goal of this study was to test the impact of involving patients in setting healthcare improvement priorities for chronic care at the community level.
methods
designCluster randomized controlled trial. Local communities were randomized in intervention (priority setting with patient involvement) and control sites (no patient involvement).
settingCommunities in a canadian region were required to set priorities for improving chronic disease management in primary care, from a list of 37 validated quality indicators.
interventionPatients were consulted in writing, before participating in face-to-face deliberation with professionals. CONTROL: Professionals established priorities among themselves, without patient involvement.
participantsA total of 172 individuals from six communities participated in the study, including 83 chronic disease patients, and 89 health professionals. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the level of agreement between patients' and professionals' priorities. Secondary outcomes included professionals' intention to use the selected quality indicators, and the costs of patient involvement.
resultsPriorities established with patients were more aligned with core generic components of the Medical Home and Chronic Care Model, including: access to primary care, self-care support, patient participation in clinical decisions, and partnership with community organizations (p < 0.01). Priorities established by professionals alone placed more emphasis on the technical quality of single disease management. The involvement intervention fostered mutual influence between patients and professionals, which resulted in a 41% increase in agreement on common priorities (95%CI: +12% to +58%, p < 0.01). Professionals' intention to use the selected quality indicators was similar in intervention and control sites. Patient involvement increased the costs of the prioritization process by 17%, and required 10% more time to reach consensus on common priorities.
conclusionsPatient involvement can change priorities driving healthcare improvement at the population level. Future research should test the generalizability of these findings to other contexts, and assess its impact on patient care.
trial registrationThe Netherlands National Trial Register #NTR2496.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.