ArticleBMC health services research2015
Measuring organisational readiness for patient engagement (MORE): an international online Delphi consensus study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-mediated knowledge translation (PKT) interventions for clinical encounters: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2016Pooled it
- The UPFRONT project: tailored implementation and evaluation of a patient decision aid to support shared decision-making about management of symptomatic uterine fibroids.Implementation science : IS · 2024Trial
- Implementing and evaluating visual key information pages compared to text-based key information: protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Schools' Readiness for Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Education: an Overview of Theoretical Models.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2025Review
- Understanding the connection between hospital goals and patient and family engagement: A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Refining a capability development framework for building successful consumer and staff partnerships in healthcare quality improvement: A coproduced eDelphi study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Review
- The patient as a prosumer of healthcare: insights from a bibliometric-interpretive review.Journal of health organization and management · 2022Article
- Impacts of patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: qualitative interviews with patient/family advisors and hospital staff.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Organizational capacity for patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: interviews with patient/family advisors, managers and clinicians.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021Article
- Processes for evidence summarization for patient decision aids: A Delphi consensus study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Enhancing organizational readiness for implementation: constructing a typology of readiness-development strategies using a modified Delphi process.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Approaches to optimize patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: Qualitative interviews.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Hospital capacity for patient engagement in planning and improving health services: a cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- How do guideline developers identify, incorporate and report patient preferences? An international cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Implementation of the uterine fibroids Option Grid patient decision aids across five organizational settings: a randomized stepped-wedge study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2019Article
- Modified Delphi survey for the evidence summarisation of patient decision aids: Study protocol.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Teaching undergraduate medical students Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (CAP): a Delphi study on curriculum content.BMC medical education · 2018Article
- Using qualitative Health Research methods to improve patient and public involvement and engagement in research.Research involvement and engagement · 2018Article
- Enhancing Mental and Physical Health of Women through Engagement and Retention (EMPOWER): a protocol for a program of research.Implementation science : IS · 2017Article
- Comparative analysis of stakeholder experiences with an online approach to prioritizing patient-centered research topics.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWidespread implementation of patient engagement by organisations and clinical teams is not a reality yet. The aim of this study is to develop a measure of organisational readiness for patient engagement designed to monitor and facilitate a healthcare organisation's willingness and ability to effectively implement patient engagement in healthcare.
methodsThe development of the MORE (Measuring Organisational Readiness for patient Engagement) scale was guided by Weiner's theory of organisational readiness for change. Weiner postulates that an organisation's readiness is determined by both the willingness and ability to implement the change (i.e. in this context: patient engagement). A first version of the scale was developed based on a literature search and evaluation of pre-existing tools. We invited multi-disciplinary stakeholders to participate in a two-round online Delphi survey. Respondents were asked to rate the importance of each proposed item, and to comment on the proposed domains and items. Second round participants received feedback from the first round and were asked to re-rate the importance of the revised, new and unchanged items, and to provide comments.
resultsThe first version of the scale contained 51 items divided into three domains: (1) Respondents' characteristics; (2) the organisation's willingness to implement patient engagement; and (3) the organisation's ability to implement patient engagement. 131 respondents from 16 countries (health care managers, policy makers, clinicians, patients and patient representatives, researchers, and other stakeholders) completed the first survey, and 72 of them also completed the second survey. During the Delphi process, 34 items were reworded, 8 new items were added, 5 items were removed, and 18 were combined. The scale's instructions were revised. The final version of MORE totalled 38 items; 5 on stakeholders, 13 on an organisation's willingness to implement, and 20 on an organisation's ability to implement patient engagement in healthcare.
conclusionsThe Delphi technique was successfully used to refine the scale's instructions, domains and items, using input from a broad range of international stakeholders, hoping that MORE can be applied in a variety of healthcare contexts worldwide. Further assessment is needed to determine the psychometric properties of the scale.
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.