ReviewThe patient2017
Patient and Public Involvement in the Development of Healthcare Guidance: An Overview of Current Methods and Future Challenges.
Review in The patient, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Towards conceptualizing patients as partners in health systems: a systematic review and descriptive synthesis.Health research policy and systems · 2023Pooled it
- Practical Considerations for Using Online Methods to Engage Patients in Guideline Development.The patient · 2018Pooled it
- The Guidelines International Network Public Toolkit: Supporting Guideline Developers to Implement Best-Practice for Patient and Public Involvement.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Validation of a method for synthesizing public consultations to inform decision-making in health technology assessment (HTA) in Brazil: a Delphi consensus.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Promoting informed health choices: the long and winding road.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2025Article
- Importance, facilitators and barriers for finnish general practitioner involvement in clinical practice guideline panels: a survey.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Exploring the purpose and stages of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in audiology research: a case study approach.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Series: Public engagement with research. Part 4: Maximising the benefits of involving the public in research implementation.The European journal of general practice · 2023Article
- Patient and public involvement in the development of clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2022Article
- What matters for people with brain cancer? Selecting clinical quality indicators for an Australian Brain Cancer Registry.Neuro-oncology practice · 2022Article
- A Systematic Review of Patient Engagement Experiences in Brain Disorders.Patient related outcome measures · 2022Review
- The views of health guideline developers on the use of automation in health evidence synthesis.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in preclinical research: A scoping review protocol.HRB open research · 2021Article
- Patient engagement in a Canadian consensus forum for heart donation after circulatory determination of death.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2020Article
- Patient and public involvement in the development of clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2020Article
- How to identify, incorporate and report patient preferences in clinical guidelines: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
- Patient and Family Participation in Clinical Guidelines Development: The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Experience.Journal of participatory medicine · 2020Article
- Involving People with Learning Disabilities in Guideline Development.The patient · 2020Article
- Patient and public involvement facilitators: Could they be the key to the NHS quality improvement agenda?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
- Practical Considerations in Using Online Modified-Delphi Approaches to Engage Patients and Other Stakeholders in Clinical Practice Guideline Development.The patient · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical guidelines and health technology assessments are valuable instruments to improve the quality of healthcare delivery and aim to integrate the best available evidence with real-world, expert context. The role of patient and public involvement in their development has grown in recent decades, and this article considers the international literature exploring aspects of this participation, including the integration of experiential and scientific knowledge, recruitment strategies, models of involvement, stages of involvement, and methods of evaluation. These developments have been underpinned by the parallel rise of public involvement and evidence-based medicine as important concepts in health policy. Improving the recruitment of guideline group chairs, widening evidence reviews to include patient preference studies, adapting guidance presentation to highlight patient preference points and providing clearer instructions on how patient organisations can submit their intelligence are emerging proposals that may further enhance patient and public involvement in their processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27830457What 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.