Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25379679›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2014

Active patient participation in the development of an online intervention.

Inge Renske van Bruinessen, Evelyn M van Weel-Baumgarten, Harm Wouter Snippe, Hans Gouw, Josée M Zijlstra, Sandra van Dulmen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. [Patient participation in the development and application of eHealth].TSG : tijdschrift voor gezondheidswetenschappen · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Feasibility of a self-help web-based intervention targeting young cancer patients with sexual problems and fertility distress.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    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

6 authors.

Inge Renske van BruinessenNIVEL (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), Utrecht, Netherlands. i.vanbruinessen@nivel.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0062-8370
Evelyn M van Weel-BaumgartenORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2700-1092

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn important and challenging part of living with cancer relates to the repeated visits to the hospital. Since how patients cope between these post-diagnostic visits depends partly on the information and support received from their physician during the visits, it is important to make the most of them. Recent findings reinforce the importance of training not only the health care professionals in communication skills, but providing patients with support in communication as well. Delivering such supportive interventions online can have potential benefits in terms of accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and ability to tailor information to personal needs. However, problems with attrition (dropout, non-usage) during the test phase and poor uptake after implementation are frequently reported. The marginal level of engagement of the patient as end user seems to play a role in this. Therefore, recent research suggests integrating theory-based development methods with methods that promote involvement of the patient at an early stage. This paper describes a participatory protocol, used to let patients guide a theory-informed development process.

objectiveThe objective of this project was to apply a bottom-up inspired procedure to develop a patient-centered intervention with corresponding evaluation and implementation plan.

methodsThe applied development protocol was based on the intervention mapping framework, combined with patient participatory methods that were inspired by the participation ladder and user-centred design methods.

resultsThe applied protocol led to a self-directed online communication intervention aimed at helping patients gain control during their communications with health care professionals. It also led to an evaluation plan and an implementation plan. The protocol enabled the continuous involvement of patient research partners and the partial involvement of patient service users, which led to valuable insights and improvements.

conclusionsThe applied protocol realized patient participation on different levels throughout the entire project. Early involvement, involvement on different levels, and flexibility in terms of planning and setup seem to be preconditions to creating a bottom-up inspired development procedure with (seriously ill) patients. Further research is necessary to find out if a more patient-centered approach improves the implementation and uptake of eHealth interventions.

trial registrationNetherlands National Trial Register ID number: NTR3779; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=3779 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6TdfALKxV).

Indexed as

communicationintervention developmentmalignant lymphomaonline interventionpatient participationself-help application

Identifiers

PMID25379679
PMCPMC4259996

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.