Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25470341›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Patient engagement with research: European population register study.

Christopher McKevitt, Nina Fudge, Siobhan Crichton, Yannick Bejot, Benoît Daubail, Antonio Di Carlo, Patricia Fearon, Peter Kolominsky-Rabas, Anita Sheldenkar, Sophie Newbound and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A scoping review of patient and public involvement in empirical stroke research.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Patient-initiated recruitment for clinical research: Evaluation of an outpatient letter research statement.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    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

12 authors.

Christopher McKevittDivision of Health and Social Care Research, King's College London, London, UK.
Nina FudgeDivision of Health and Social Care Research, King's College London, London, UK.
Siobhan CrichtonDivision of Health and Social Care Research, King's College London, London, UK.
Yannick BejotDijon Stroke Registry, University Hospital and Medical School of Dijon, University of Burgundy, Dijon, France.
Benoît DaubailDijon Stroke Registry, University Hospital and Medical School of Dijon, University of Burgundy, Dijon, France.
Antonio Di CarloUniversity of Florence & Institute of Neuroscience, National Research Council of Italy, Sesto Fiorentino (FI), Italy.
Patricia FearonAcademic Section of Geriatric Medicine, Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Peter Kolominsky-RabasInterdisciplinary Centre for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Public Health, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Anita SheldenkarDivision of Health and Social Care Research, King's College London, London, UK.
Sophie NewboundNIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
Charles D A WolfeDivision of Health and Social Care Research, King's College London, London, UK.
European Implementation Score (EIS) Collaborative Group

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0407-10184
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLay involvement in implementation of research evidence into practice may include using research findings to guide individual care, as well as involvement in research processes and policy development. Little is known about the conditions required for such involvement.

aimTo assess stroke survivors' research awareness, use of research evidence in their own care and readiness to be involved in research processes.

methodsCross sectional survey of stroke survivors participating in population-based stroke registers in six European centres.

resultsThe response rate was 74% (481/647). Reasons for participation in register research included responding to clinician request (56%) and to 'give something back' (19%); however, 20% were unaware that they were participating in a stroke register. Research awareness was generally low: 57% did not know the purpose of the register they had been recruited to; 73% reported not having received results from the register they took part in; 60% did not know about any research on stroke care. Few participants (7.6%) used research evidence during their consultations with a doctor. The 34% of participants who were interested in being involved in research were younger, more highly educated and already research aware.

conclusionsAcross Europe, stroke survivors already participating in research appear ill informed about stroke research. Researchers, healthcare professionals and patient associations need to improve how research results are communicated to patient populations and research participants, and to raise awareness of the relationship between research evidence and increased quality of care.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthBiomedical ResearchRegistriesStrokeAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationSurvivorsinvolvement in researchresearch awarenessstrokesurvey

Identifiers

PMID25470341
PMCPMC5810710

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.