ArticleThe patient2017
Deliberative Engagement Methods for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research.
Article in The patient, 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.
- Practical Considerations for Using Online Methods to Engage Patients in Guideline Development.The patient · 2018Pooled it
- Different corticosteroid induction regimens in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: the SIRJIA mixed-methods feasibility study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Ethical Considerations for Clinical Data Sharing in Craniofacial Research: Recommendations From a Multidisciplinary Working Group.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
- Men's Preferences for Exiting Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Surveillance: A Deliberative Engagement Session Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Exiting Surveillance From Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening: The Views of Clinicians, and Men in Surveillance and Their Family Members.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- The Effectiveness of Adaptations for Online Remote Public Deliberation Across Three Continents: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Public deliberation to assess patient views on biosimilar medication switching for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Grappling With the Inclusion of Patients and the Public in Consensus Building: A Commentary on Inclusion, Safety, and Accessibility Comment on "Evaluating Public Participation in a Deliberative Dialogue: A Single Case Study".International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- An ethical analysis of policy dialogues.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- The added value and unintended negative consequences of public involvement processes in the planning, development and implementation of community health services: Results from a thematic synthesis.The International journal of health planning and management · 2022Article
- Preparing newborn screening for the future: a collaborative stakeholder engagement exploring challenges and opportunities to modernizing the newborn screening system.BMC pediatrics · 2022Article
- Public Attitudes toward Consent When Research Is Integrated into Care-Any "Ought" from All the "Is"?The Hastings Center report · 2021Article
- MindKind: A mixed-methods protocol for the feasibility of global digital mental health studies in young people.Wellcome open research · 2021Article
- Eliciting patient views on the allocation of limited healthcare resources: a deliberation on hepatitis C treatment in the Veterans Health Administration.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Addressing Health Disparities Through Deliberative Methods: Citizens' Panels for Health Equity.American journal of public health · 2020Article
- Infringement of the right to surgical informed consent: negligent disclosure and its impact on patient trust in surgeons at public general hospitals - the voice of the patient.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- Protective parents and permissive children: what qualitative interviews with parents and children can tell us about the feasibility of juvenile idiopathic arthritis trials.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2018Article
- Stakeholder perspectives regarding alternate approaches to informed consent for comparative effectiveness research.Learning health systems · 2018Article
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
There is growing emphasis on eliciting and incorporating stakeholder perspectives into health research and public policy development. The deliberative engagement session (DES) method provides one approach to elicit informed preferences from patients and other stakeholders on policy issues. DES involves day-long interaction with participants, including short plenary presentations followed by small group discussion. While interest in DES methods is expanding, practical guidance for researchers on this method remains limited. In this paper, we describe the DES method and its contemporary relevance for health policy research, illustrate how to conduct a DES using an example of a recent patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) study with which we were involved, and discuss strengths and challenges of using this approach. DES methods generate rich data, reduce the risk of eliciting uniformed preferences or non-attitudes, and increase the likelihood of eliciting informed, reflective preferences. However, they are resource-intensive, and thus generally require trading away a larger, more representative sample. Despite these limitations, the DES method, when carefully designed, is well-suited for engaging stakeholders in research on complex health policy issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28374286What 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.