Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29777334›Full record

ArticleJournal of community health2018

Patient Engagement in Community Health Center Leadership: How Does it Happen?

Anjana E Sharma, Beatrice Huang, Margae Knox, Rachel Willard-Grace, Michael B Potter

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Who represents me? A patient-derived model of patient engagement via patient and family advisory councils (PFACs).Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anjana E SharmaCenter for Excellence in Primary Care, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. anjana.sharma@ucsf.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-5541-2414
Beatrice HuangCenter for Excellence in Primary Care, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Margae KnoxCenter for Excellence in Primary Care, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Rachel Willard-GraceCenter for Excellence in Primary Care, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Michael B PotterCenter for Excellence in Primary Care, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Engaging University of California Stakeholders for Biorespository ResearchUL1TR000004 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GRANDIS, JENNIFER RUBIN · 2012 to 2015
$78.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR000004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient engagement in primary care leadership is an important means to involve community voices at community health centers. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are mandated to have patient representation within their governing boards, while practices seeking patient-centered medical home certification receive credit for implementing patient advisory councils (PACs). Our objective was to compare and contrast how community health centers engage patients in clinic management, decision-making and planning within governing boards versus PACs. Qualitative study conducted from August 2016 to June 2017 at community health centers in California, Arizona and Hawaii. We interviewed practice leaders of patient engagement programs at their site. Eligible clinics had patient representatives within their governing board, PAC, or both. We assessed patient demographics, roles and responsibilities of patients participating, and extent of involvement in quality improvement among governing boards versus PACs. We interviewed 19 sites, of which 17 were FQHCs that had governing boards. Of the 17 FQHCs, 11 had also implemented PACs. Two non-FQHC safety-net sites had PACs but did not have governing boards. Governing board members had formal, structured membership responsibilities such as finances and hiring personnel. PAC roles were more flexible, focusing on day-to-day clinic operations. Clinics tended to recruit governing board patient members for their skill set and professional experience; PAC member recruitment focused more on demographic representation of the clinic's patient population. Both groups worked on quality improvement, but governing boards tended to review clinic performance metrics, while PAC members were involved in specific project planning and implementation to improve clinical outcomes and patient experience. Patient involvement in clinic improvement in CHCs includes higher-level decision-making and governance through mechanisms such as governing boards, as well as engagement in day-to-day practice improvement through PACs. These roles offer differing, but valuable insights to clinic programs and policies.

Indexed as

LeadershipArizonaCaliforniaCommunity Health CentersDecision MakingFemaleGoverning BoardHawaiiHumansPatient ParticipationPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementMedical homesPatient centered carePatient engagementPatient participation

Identifiers

PMID29777334
OpenAlexW2804288862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.