ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2017
Patient involvement in guidelines is poor five years after institute of medicine standards: review of guideline methodologies.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Using best-worst scaling to inform policy decisions in Africa: a literature review.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) position statement of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR): general principles of IBD management.Techniques in coloproctology · 2020Guideline
- Impact of patient involvement on clinical practice guideline development: a parallel group study.Implementation science : IS · 2018Trial
- The patient perspective in benign foregut surgery guidelines: bridging evidence, values, and clinical decision-making.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- The Guidelines International Network Public Toolkit: Supporting Guideline Developers to Implement Best-Practice for Patient and Public Involvement.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Patient Involvement in the Development of Clinical Practice Guidelines - An Interview Study on the Experiences of Patients and Their Representatives in Germany.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Interest-Holder Engagement in Health Guideline Development: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- The Extent and Nature of Lived Experience Engagement in the Development of Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines, 2014-2025: A Scoping Review.The Medical journal of Australia · 2026Article
- Participatory development of patient-targeted guideline material in palliative care: A qualitative evaluation.Palliative care and social practice · 2026Article
- Community engagement in health guidelines and other normative products: a methodological review.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Review
- Patient involvement in the development of clinical practice guidelines in Germany-A meta-research study.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- Clinical Practice Guideline Development in Pediatric Emergency Medicine Departments Across the United States: A Cross-sectional Study.Pediatric emergency care · 2025Article
- Identification and Prioritization of Canadian Society of Nephrology Clinical Practice Guideline Topics.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Assessing TDApp: An AI-based clinical decision support system for ADHD treatment recommendations.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Guidance for engagement in health guideline development: A scoping review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Protocol: Assessing the impact of interest-holder engagement on guideline development: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Article
- Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: an assessment based on the AGREE II, AGREE-REX tools and the RIGHT checklist.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- [Participation of Patients in the Development of Clinical Guidelines: A Selective Country Comparison in a Narrative Review].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2023Review
- 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 · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
plain english summaryThe 2011 standards for trustworthy development of healthcare guidelines published by the United States-based Institute of Medicine recommend that guideline developers involve patients and public representatives in the development process. The standards recommend that (1) patients and the public be actively involved as members on guideline development panels and (2) guideline developers seek patient and public input during review of the draft guideline. In this study, researchers reviewed the patient and public involvement strategies of guideline developers in the United States by looking at websites and guideline development practices. Of 101 organizations reviewed, only 8% require patient and public involvement on guideline development groups; 15% sometimes require it or describe it as optional. Only 24% of guideline developers always post draft guidelines for public comment. Thirteen percent of guideline developers ask patients or patient organizations to review draft guidelines at least some of the time. Only 20% of guideline developers create patient-targeted guideline products (e.g. patient summaries of guidelines). These low numbers show that there is a substantial gap between standards for patient and public involvement in guideline development and what is actually happening. This is a missed opportunity, as patient and public contributions to guideline development include assessing guideline priorities, introducing new topics, identifying important populations and outcomes, suggesting whether findings are meaningful, prompting holistic approaches to care, assessing how recommendations interact with patient values, and writing plain-language guideline versions. Guideline developers must commit to prioritizing patient and public involvement as one part of trustworthy guideline development. ABSTRACT:
backgroundThe United States-based Institute of Medicine 2011 standards for trustworthy clinical practice guideline development recommended patient and public involvement in guideline development via participation by patients and public representatives on guideline development groups and via external review and public comment strategies. Guideline developer compliance with these standards has not been assessed. This study aimed to identify the frequency with which United States guideline developers are employing participation, consultation, and communication patient and public involvement strategies.
methodsTwo reviewers independently extracted current patient and public involvement strategies of independent guideline developers, either (1) an organizational member of the Guidelines-International-Network North America and/or (2) having ≥2 guidelines in the National Guideline Clearinghouse between March 2011 and November 2015. Publicly available information was extracted from guideline developers' websites, methodology manuals, and guidelines between November 2015 and December 2016. Disagreements were resolved by discussion.
resultsOf 101 organizations meeting inclusion criteria, only 8% require patient/public involvement on guideline development groups; 15% sometimes require it or describe it as optional. Only 24% always utilize public comment on draft guidelines; 13% engage patients/public in external review at least some of the time. Twenty percent of developers create patient-targeted guideline products.
conclusionsThere remains a substantial gap between patient/public involvement standards for guideline development and practice in the United States, even 5 years after publication of Institute of Medicine standards. This is a missed opportunity, as patient and public contributions to guideline development include assessing guideline priorities, introducing new topics, identifying key populations and outcomes, informing whether findings are meaningful, prompting holistic approaches to care, assessing how recommendations interact with patient values, and writing plain-language guideline versions. Guideline developers must commit to prioritizing patient and public involvement as one element of trustworthy guideline development.
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.