Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30025543›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2018

Patient-Oriented Research Competencies in Health (PORCH) for patients, healthcare providers, decision-makers and researchers: protocol of a scoping review.

Anastasia A Mallidou, Noreen Frisch, Mary M Doyle-Waters, Martha L P MacLeod, John Ward, Pat Atherton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Increasing Engagement of Women Veterans in Health Research.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Research in pediatric oncology: Engaging parents to strengthen research processes, outcomes and knowledge translation.Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Understanding the motivations of patients: A co-designed project to understand the factors behind patient engagement.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019
    Article
  14. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Anastasia A MallidouSchool of Nursing, University of Victoria, 3800 Finnerty (Ring) Road, Victoria, British Columbia, V8P 5C2, Canada. mallidou@uvic.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-6094-567X
Noreen FrischSchool of Nursing, University of Victoria, 3800 Finnerty (Ring) Road, Victoria, British Columbia, V8P 5C2, Canada.
Mary M Doyle-WatersCentre for Clinical Epidemiology & Evaluation, Research Pavilion, 708A-828 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Martha L P MacLeodNorthern Health - UNBC Knowledge Mobilization Research Chair, University of Northern British Columbia, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, V2N 4Z9, Canada.
John WardResearch Navigation and Project Lead, BC SUPPORT Unit, Suite 420 - 1367 West Broadway, Vancouver, BC, V6H 4A7, Canada.
Pat AthertonTraining and Virtual Networking Platform, BC SUPPORT Unit, Suite 420 - 1367 West Broadway, Vancouver, BC, V6H 4A7, Canada.
University of Victoria · CABC Research (Canada) · CACentre for Advancing Health Outcomes · CAUniversity of Northern British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-Oriented Research (POR) is a Canadian initiative for health research that refers to research processes informed by full and active patient involvement in all aspects of the research. Ideally, POR results in a wide dissemination of the research findings and the uptake of such findings in both clinical practice and health policy. The Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) identifies four stakeholder groups that are involved in POR who are envisioned to take on a collaborative role in enacting this approach to research. Those stakeholder groups are patients, researchers, health care providers and healthcare decision-makers. To achieve collaboration among stakeholders in POR, tools, resources, education/training and capacity building are required for each stakeholder group engaged in this work. Therefore, this review focuses on understanding and articulating competencies needed by participants to engage in POR. The aim is to summarize existing knowledge on discrete POR competencies for the four stakeholder groups; to support collaboration among them for uptake and strengthening of POR; and to inform policy, education and future research. Accordingly, our research question is 'What are the POR core competencies needed by patients, researchers, healthcare providers, and decision-makers?' The main objectives are to (1) systematically explore the academic and grey literature on competencies needed for these stakeholder groups to engage in POR; (2) map the eligible publications and research gaps in this area; (3) gain knowledge to support collaboration among stakeholders; and (4) provide recommendations for further research to use competencies that emerge in developing stakeholder groups' readiness to conduct POR. METHODS/

designWe will use a methodologically rigorous scoping review approach including formulation of the research question and development of the protocol; screening and identification of the literature; selection of relevant studies; data extraction; and collation, summary and report of the results. Our eligibility criteria include elements of population (patients, researchers, healthcare providers and decision-makers); concept (competencies: knowledge, skills, attitudes; and POR); context (level of involvement in research, settings, funding sources); study design (sample, stakeholder group, methodology, grey literature, theoretical framework); outcomes (primary: relevant to decision-making/policy and practice; and secondary: relevant to education and research); language (English, French); and timing (1990-2017). Registration with PROSPERO is not eligible for scoping reviews; so, it has not been registered. DISCUSSION: Research on core competencies required to enact POR is in its infancy. In this review, we can articulate what is known and thought about competencies (knowledge, skills and attitudes) needed by individuals on POR research teams and ultimately provide knowledge that could impact research, practice, education and policy. Identification of competencies can contribute to design of healthcare professionals' basic and ongoing educational programmes, patient training in research, and professional development activities for health care providers and decision-makers. In addition, knowledge of core competencies can permit individuals to evaluate their own readiness to enter POR research teams.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelPatient ParticipationResearch DesignBiomedical ResearchClinical CompetenceCooperative BehaviorDecision MakingHumansScoping Reviews as TopicPatient and public involvementPatient engagementPatient-oriented researchPOR competencies (knowledge, skills, attitudes)Scoping review

Identifiers

PMID30025543
PMCPMC6053801
OpenAlexW2884226720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.