Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29058625›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2017

The impact of patient advisors on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review.

Anjana E Sharma, Margae Knox, Victor L Mleczko, J Nwando Olayiwola

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06608589 (CONSTELLATIONS Living Lab), which is not on this map. Cited by 74 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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.

NCT06608589 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

CONSTELLATIONS Living Lab: Development, Implementation and Evaluation of a Patient-oriented Quality Improvement Program Targeting Care Transitions of Older Adults Living with Major Neurocognitive Disorders and Their Caregivers.

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2023 to 2026Enrolled700ConditionsAlzheimer Disease, Dementia, Neurocognitive DeclineArmsCoMPAS+ MNCDs Program - Quality improvement program targeting the care transitions of patients living with a major neurocognitive disorder and their caregivers
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Patient and family engagement interventions in primary care patient safety: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Promoting Patient Safety Through Patient Engagement at the Organisational Level: A Delphi-Based Needs Assessment Among Patient and Family Advisory Councils.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anjana E SharmaCenter for Excellence in Primary Care, Department of Family & Community Medicine, UCSF, 995 Potrero Ave, Ward 83, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA. Anjana.sharma@ucsf.edu.
Margae KnoxCenter for Excellence in Primary Care, Department of Family & Community Medicine, UCSF, 995 Potrero Ave, Ward 83, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Victor L MleczkoContra Costa Regional Medical Center, Family Medicine Residency Program, 2500 Alhambra Avenue, Martinez, CA, 94553, USA.
J Nwando OlayiwolaUniversity of California, San Francisco, 2120 University Avenue, Berkeley, CA, 94704, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient advisory councils are a way for healthcare organizations to promote patient engagement. Despite mandates to implement patient advisory councils through programs like the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH), there is a paucity of data measuring the impact of patients functioning in advisory roles. Our objective is to investigate whether patient engagement in patient advisory councils is linked to improvements in clinical quality, patient safety or patient satisfaction.

methodsWe searched PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL and Google Scholar for English language publications between November 2002 to August 2015, using a combination of "patient advisor" and "care outcomes" search terms. Article selection utilized dual screening facilitated by DistillerSR software, with group discussion to resolve discordance. Observational studies, randomized controlled trials, and case studies were included that described patients serving in an advisory role where primary outcomes were mentioned. Reference lists of included studies and grey literature searches were conducted. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed to synthesize results.

resultsDatabase searching yielded 639 articles total after removing duplicates, with 129 articles meeting full text inclusion criteria. 32 articles were identified for final review, 16 of which were case studies. Advisory roles included patient advisory councils, ad-hoc patient committees, community advisory councils, experience-based co-design, and other. Four practice-based studies from one research group, involving community advisors in the design of public health interventions, found improved clinical outcomes. No prospective experimental studies assessed the impact of patient advisors on patient safety or patient satisfaction. One cluster-randomized RCT showed that patient advisors helped health care planning efforts identify priorities more aligned with the PCMH. Ten case studies reported anecdotal benefit to individual patient advisors.

conclusionFive included studies demonstrate promising methods for evaluating patient engagement in healthcare delivery and describe impacts on clinical outcomes and priority setting. Based on the case studies found, patient advisors tend to contribute to patient-facing services that may affect clinical care but are not easily evaluated. As clinics and hospitals implement patient advisory councils, rigorous evaluation of their programs is needed to support the expansion of system-level patient engagement.

trial registrationThis systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database of the University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (ID: 2015: CRD42015030020 ).

Indexed as

Advisory CommitteesPatient ParticipationTreatment OutcomeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDelivery of Health CareFemaleHospitalsHumansMaleMiddle AgedExperience of carePatient advisory councilsPatient engagementPractice improvement

Identifiers

PMID29058625
PMCPMC5651621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.