Trial reportImplementation science : IS2018
Impact of patient involvement on clinical practice guideline development: a parallel group study.
Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers, 13 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
92 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Hydration Care After Stroke: A Systematic Review of International Clinical Practice Guidelines.Nutrients · 2026Pooled it
- A Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline: a systematic review and recommendations on advance care planning and shared decision-making.BMC palliative care · 2024Pooled it
- Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A systematic review and synthesis of global stroke guidelines on behalf of the World Stroke Organization.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Predictors of response to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in dementia: A systematic review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Does patient and public involvement influence the development of competency frameworks for the health professions? A systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Consumer engagement in health care policy, research and services: A systematic review and meta-analysis of methods and effects.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- The methodological quality is insufficient in clinical practice guidelines in the context of COVID-19: systematic review.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- Are clinical practice guidelines for low back pain interventions of high quality and updated? A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- What are the views of those participating in a trial investigating acute post-traumatic benign paroxysmal positional vertigo? A qualitative study.Brain injury · 2025Trial
- 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
- Global variability in colorectal cancer screening guidelines: panel composition and recommendations.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Preserving Patient Influence During Interrupted Guideline Participation.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Diversity representation in the development of respiratory society guidance documents.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Ensuring Clinical Practice Guidelines Meet the Needs of the End-User: a Prioritization Survey for Guideline Topics for Behavioural and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia.Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ · 2026Article
32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
backgroundPatient and public involvement (PPI) is recognized as a key component of clinical practice guideline development with important implications for guideline implementability. The impact of PPI on guidelines, however, has not been rigorously assessed. Better understanding of the impact of PPI must start with guideline question formation, which drives all subsequent development steps. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of PPI on guideline question formation and validate a conceptual model of patient and public contributions to guidelines.
methodsFor development of a clinical practice guideline on the topic of using amyloid positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of dementia, we convened two parallel guideline development groups, one with and one without patient representatives. Participating physicians were randomized to group assignment. Each group developed Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Time (PICOT) questions and identified key benefits and harms to incorporate in guideline development. Analysis included a descriptive comparison of proposed PICOT questions, benefits, and harms between groups and a qualitative analysis of discussion themes from audio recordings of the question development retreats.
resultsProposed guideline questions, benefits, and harms were largely similar between groups, but only the experimental group proposed outcomes relating to development of cognitive impairment at specific time points and rate of progression. The qualitative analysis of the discussions occurring during guideline question development demonstrated key differences in group conduct and validated the proposed conceptual model of patient and public contributions to guidelines. PPI influenced the conduct of guideline development, scope, inclusion of patient-relevant topics, outcome selection, and planned approaches to recommendation development, implementation, and dissemination with implications for both guideline developers and the guideline development process.
conclusionsEvidence of how PPI impacts guideline development underscores the importance of engaging patient stakeholders in guideline development and highlights developer- and guideline-specific outcomes of PPI, both of which have implications for guideline implementation. It also raises the question of whether guidelines developed without such input are acceptable for use. PPI should be considered an essential element of trustworthy guideline development for purposes of development and funding.
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.