Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28279216›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Understanding optimal approaches to patient and caregiver engagement in the development of cancer practice guidelines: a mixed methods study.

Melissa C Brouwers, Marija Vukmirovic, Karen Spithoff, Julie Makarski

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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 · 2024
    Article
  6. Patient and carer involvement in the formulation of research questions: findings from the Italian guideline on palliative care in adults with glioma.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Melissa C BrouwersDepartment of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Campus, G Wing, 2nd Floor, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada. mbrouwer@mcmaster.ca.
Marija VukmirovicDepartment of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Campus, G Wing, 2nd Floor, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Karen SpithoffDepartment of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Campus, G Wing, 2nd Floor, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Julie MakarskiFormerly from the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPractice guidelines (PGs) can assist health care practitioners and patients to make decisions about health care options. A key component of high quality PGs is the consideration of patient values and preferences. A mixed methods study was conducted to understand optimal approaches to patient engagement in the development of cancer PGs.

methodsCancer patients, survivors, family members and caregivers were recruited from cancer clinics, follow-up clinics, community support programs, a provincial patient and family advisory committee, and a provincial cancer PG development program. Participants attended a workshop, completed a survey, or participated in a telephone interview, to provide information about PG awareness, attitudes, information needs, training, engagement approaches and barriers and facilitators.

resultsForty-one participants (12 workshop attendees, 21 survey respondents and 8 interviewees) provided data. For those with no PG development experience, fewer than half were previously aware of PGs but perceived several benefits to the inclusion of this perspective. Common barriers to participation across the groups were time commitment, duration of the PG development process, and financial costs. Positive beliefs about the contributions that could be made and practical considerations (e.g., orientation and training, defined roles and expectations) were identified as key features in the successful integration of patients into the PG development process. There was no single model of engagement favored over another.

conclusionsStudy results align with similar studies in other contexts and with international patient engagement efforts. Findings are being used to test new patient engagement models in a programmatic PG development initiative in Ontario, Canada.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAttitude to HealthCaregiversDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOntarioPatient ParticipationPerceptionProgram DevelopmentCancerClinical practice guidelinesConsumer engagementMixed methodsPatient engagement

Identifiers

PMID28279216
PMCPMC5345242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.