ArticleFamily practice2017
Patient perspectives on engagement in shared decision-making for asthma care.
Article in Family practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The experience of shared decision-making for people with asthma: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Analysis of the care needs of family caregivers of patients with bladder cancer undergoing urostomy: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Psychological and Related Factors Influencing Adherence to Biologic Therapies in Asthma: A Scoping Review.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2025Article
- Lessons Learned from a Parkinson's Research Patient Advisory Board Model with Academic Centers.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2025Article
- Article
- Establishing a standing patient advisory board in family practice research: A qualitative evaluation from patients' and researchers' perspectives.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Challenges and promising solutions to engaging patients in healthcare implementation in the United States: an environmental scan.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma: a systematic review.ERJ open research · 2023Review
- Patient and researcher experiences of patient engagement in primary care health care research: A participatory qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Sleep Quality Reports From Family Caregivers and Matched Non-caregiving Controls in a Population-Based Study.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2022Article
- Patients with Severe Uncontrolled Asthma: Perception of Asthma Control and its Management.Pulmonary therapy · 2022Article
- Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Review
- A rapid realist review of patient engagement in patient-oriented research and health care system impacts: part one.Research involvement and engagement · 2021Review
- Patients as partners in health research: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Perspectives on decisions for treatment and care in severe asthma.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2021Review
- Article
- Preparing for patient partnership: A scoping review of patient partner engagement and evaluation in research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
- Research nurses as practice facilitators to disseminate an asthma shared decision making intervention.BMC nursing · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Engagement of patient and advocacy group stakeholders is increasingly considered essential to meaningful outcomes research. Patient-centred research benefits from partnership formation between patients, clinicians and research team members. Here, we describe the rationale for engaging patients on a research team and a case study of patient engagement on an asthma shared decision-making study. Methods: Here, we describe a case study of patient engagement in outcomes research and examine the variety of roles patients are engaged in and the associated impact on the study. Results: Patients assisted the project at various levels and were integrated into the research team by (i) advising on study development; (ii) assisting with design and usability of study materials, including the toolkit, patient surveys and dissemination strategies; and (iii) advocacy via membership in external disease-specific organizations and participating in outcomes research conferences. Patients were engaged both individually and as members of a patient advisory board. Primary lessons learned were the importance of building a trusting partnership with patients through understanding perspectives, being aware of clearly explaining patients' roles, research methods and jargon, providing training, listening to patients' needs and understanding what the partnership means from a patient perspective. Conclusions: For the case study described, patient engagement directly influenced multiple aspects of the study, including study design, implementation, data analysis and dissemination through incorporation of the patients' and caregivers' input and concerns.
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.