ArticleMedical care2018
Patient Governance in a Patient-Powered Research Network for Adult Rheumatologic Conditions.
Article in Medical care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05603806 (Exploring Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients' Disease Activity Using Patient Reported Outcome Measures and Biometric Sensor Data), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers.
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.
Exploring Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients' Disease Activity Using Patient Reported Outcome Measures and Biometric Sensor Data (WEarables Activity in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis)
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wearable activity tracker study exploring rheumatoid arthritis patients' disease activity using patient-reported outcome measures, clinical measures, and biometric sensor data (the wear study).Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
- Lessons learned in measuring patient engagement in a Canada-wide childhood disability network.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Understanding Heterogeneity in Patients' Conceptualisation of Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cluster Analysis.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Patient engagement in a national research network: barriers, facilitators, and impacts.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Assessment of Real-World Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients Initiating Biologic Agents for the Treatment of Autoimmune Diseases: An Observational Study in Four Patient-Powered Research Networks.Patient related outcome measures · 2023Article
- Stakeholder engagement infrastructure to support multicenter research networks: Advances from the clinical research networks participating in PCORnet.Learning health systems · 2023Article
- Engaging with patients in research on knowledge translation/implementation science methods: a self study.Research involvement and engagement · 2022Article
- Protocol for the pilot randomized trial of the CArdiovascular Risk assEssment for Rheumatoid Arthritis (CARE RA) intervention: a peer coach behavioral intervention.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2022Article
- Evaluation of an Intervention to Support Patient-Rheumatologist Conversations About Escalating Treatment in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Principle Study.ACR open rheumatology · 2022Article
- Employment, Work Productivity, and Biologic Treatments in Self-Reported Axial Spondyloarthritis: a Cross-Sectional Study in a Female Predominant Population from the ArthritisPower Registry.Rheumatology and therapy · 2022Article
- Musculoskeletal care - at the confluence of data science, sensors, engineering, and computation.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Review
- A Guide to Selecting Participatory Research Methods Based on Project and Partnership Goals.Journal of participatory research methods · 2022Article
- Treatment Satisfaction and Decision-making from the Patient Perspective in Axial Spondyloarthritis: Real-World Data from a Descriptive Cross-sectional Survey Study from the ArthritisPower Registry.ACR open rheumatology · 2022Article
- Patient-Powered Research Networks of the Autoimmune Research Collaborative: Rationale, Capacity, and Future Directions.The patient · 2021Article
- Patients as partners in health research: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Which patient-reported outcomes do rheumatology patients find important to track digitally? A real-world longitudinal study in ArthritisPower.Arthritis research & therapy · 2021Article
- Mobile apps for real-world evidence in health care.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- Assessment of the many faces of PsA: single and composite measures in PsA clinical trials.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2020Review
- Barriers to treatment optimization and achievement of patients' goals: perspectives from people living with rheumatoid arthritis enrolled in the ArthritisPower registry.Arthritis research & therapy · 2020Observational
- Patients as Agents in Behavioral Health Research and Service Provision: Recommendations to Support the Learning Health System.Applied clinical informatics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-Powered Research Networks (PPRNs) are a unique type of patient-powered patient registry for patient-centered outcomes research requiring that stakeholder engagement play a key role in governance (eg, research guidance and decision making). The purpose of this report is to describe the governance structure of a newly formed PPRN and the activities undertaken prelaunch and postlaunch to evaluate and improve the engagement of patient stakeholders in governance.
methodsDuring the 18-month start-up period of ArthritisPower, a PPRN for adult rheumatologic conditions, 12 members of the patient body of the PPRN governance completed a 12-item preassessment and postassessment based on the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Engagement Rubric. The assessment was intended to measure Patient Governor (PG) perceptions of their engagement in governance within the first 3 months of their involvement at an in-person orientation. Six months later, the PG Chair initiated a mid-year evaluation with the same group to identify areas for improvement. Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 11 PGs who were asked to rate and explain their perceptions about their participation in PPRN governance, the progress of the PPRN toward conducting research, the support they receive from staff, and the support they receive from other PGs. Results were compiled and interpreted by the Chair with help from the coprincipal investigator.
resultsPreassessment/postassessments indicated that PGs understood their governance role and decision-making authority after in-person orientation and felt that major PPRN decisions were being made with their input. Feedback and scores from the PG-led mid-year evaluation coalesced around 3 themes: a preference for receiving news and updates via email to allow more discussion and decision making during conference calls, a desire for guidance about how best to help advance the PPRN toward the conduct of research, and a need to communicate with each other as a group outside of monthly conference calls. Suggested activities to support patient engagement in PPRN governance include communicating clear expectations, providing well-prepared tools for engagement, and conducting regular assessments.
conclusionsMembers of an online patient community are willing to share their expertise to participate in and shape research governance and bring both their professional and lived health experience to the development and improvement of PPRN governance structure. A patient-initiated and patient-led evaluation of governance communication procedures within the PPRN provided more specific recommendations for improvement than did an investigator-led preevaluation/postevaluation based on the PCORI Engagement Rubric.
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.