ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2017
Process and impact of patient involvement in a systematic review of shared decision making in primary care consultations.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The benefits, challenges, and best practice for patient and public involvement in evidence synthesis: A systematic review and thematic synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Quantitative Evidence Synthesis Methods for the Assessment of the Effectiveness of Treatment Sequences for Clinical and Economic Decision Making: A Review and Taxonomy of Simplifying Assumptions.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Pooled it
- Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in a doctoral research project exploring self-harm in older adults.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Pooled it
- Think. Build. Heal. Also, tell the story.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Methods of Engaging Interest-Holders in Healthcare Evidence Syntheses: A Scoping Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
- Measuring impacts of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE): a narrative review synthesis of review evidence.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Bridging the gap: empowering patients as research partners through a structured training program.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Coproducing a Cochrane Qualitative Evidence Synthesis: Process, Outcomes, and Reflections on Power.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2025Article
- Patient partner engagement in the publication process: challenges and possible solutions.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Review
- A Bibliometric Analysis of Healthcare Intervention-Related Studies Reporting Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Public involvement in an aggregate and individual participant data meta-analysis of mindfulness-based programmes for mental health promotion.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Article
- Rationalizing the Influence of Co-Design on Distress, Clinical Decision-Making and Disease Self-Management of Cancer Patients-as-Partners: A Quasi-Experimental Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Collaborating with patients and caregivers to create web-based educational resources for people affected by cirrhosis.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- A proposal to embed patient and public involvement within qualitative data collection and analysis phases of a primary care based implementation study.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Review
- Shared Decision Making in Acute Pain Management in Patients with Opioid Use Disorder: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Research Buddy partnership in a MD-PhD program: lessons learned.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Article
- Engaging Knowledge Users with Mental Health Experience in a Mixed-Methods Systematic Review of Post-secondary Students with Psychosis: Reflections and Lessons Learned from a Master's Thesis.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in systematic reviews remains uncommon, despite the policy imperative for patient involvement in research. The aim of this study was to investigate the process and impact of collaborating with members of a patient Research User Group (RUG) on a systematic review about shared decision making around prescribing analgesia in primary care consultations.
methodsFive members of an established patient RUG collaborated with researchers undertaking a systematic review with narrative synthesis, through workshops held at three time-points. These addressed the following: designing the protocol, interpreting the results and planning dissemination. Support from a RUG coordinator and user support worker facilitated collaboration throughout the review process. Researchers reflected on how PPIE modified the review at each time-point.
resultsRUG members identified factors important in shared decision making around analgesic prescribing additional to those initially proposed by the research team. Search terms and specific outcomes of interest were amended to reflect these additional factors. Thirty of the 39 patient-identified factors were absent in the published literature. The categories of factors identified were used as a framework for the narrative synthesis and for reporting results. RUG members prioritized options for disseminating the results.
conclusionPPIE collaboration throughout the systematic review impacted on the scope of the review, highlighting gaps in the literature that were important to patients. Impact on interpretation and dissemination of findings ensured the review directly reflected patient priorities. Challenges and strategies to facilitate PPIE involvement in systematic reviews and suggestions for future researchers are highlighted.
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.