ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2018
Patient involvement in the development of a psychosocial cancer rehabilitation intervention: evaluation of a shared working group with patients and researchers.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Internet-delivered mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for anxiety and depression in cancer survivors: A randomized controlled trial.Psycho-oncology · 2020Trial
- Implementing a User-Centered Design to Develop a Web-Based Sperm Banking Decision Tool for Adolescent Males with Cancer.Journal of adolescent and young adult oncology · 2026Article
- Navigating Long-Term Co-Creative Research With Young Adults Diagnosed With Cancer: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Embedding Patient and Public Engagement in a Cancer Project: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Exploring Benefits of and Barriers to Patient Involvement Through Digital Tools in Psycho-Oncology: Qualitative Study Within the Reduct Trial.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Experience, Process, and Impact of Involving Informal Caregivers of People With Dementia as Public Contributors to Inform the Development of a Complex Intervention: A Mixed-Methods Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient and public involvement in Nordic healthcare research: a scoping review of contemporary practice.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Roles, outcomes, and enablers within research partnerships: A rapid review of the literature on patient and public involvement and engagement in health research.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Review
- Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Review
- Exploring the meaning, role and experiences of a patient-led social innovation for people affected by cancer: a new collaborative care model complementing traditional cancer rehabilitation in Sweden.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Internet-delivered Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for anxiety and depression in cancer survivors: Predictors of treatment response.Internet interventions · 2021Article
- The impact of patient involvement in research: a case study of the planning, conduct and dissemination of a clinical, controlled trial.Research involvement and engagement · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
plain english summaryThe aim of this paper is to present our experiences from a shared working group (SWG) with patient representatives and researchers. The SWG collaborated on developing a psychosocial cancer rehabilitation intervention for women treated for breast cancer and men treated for prostate cancer and on the planning of an effect study of this intervention.The SWG included five patient representatives (three women treated for breast cancer and two men treated for prostate cancer), four researchers and a research assistant. The SWG met four times during the year where the intervention was developed. Data material for the present evaluation study comprises meeting documents, transcriptions of interviews with two patient representatives and three researchers from the SWG, and the primary investigator's field notes.The collaboration between patient representatives and researchers informed both the intervention and the research planning and was rewarding for the involved participants. The well-structured organization of the collaboration had a positive impact on the outcome. In addition, clear goals and clarification of expectations were important. Challenges were encountered in keeping continuity between meetings and carrying out homework as intended. It was crucial for the collaboration that patient representatives had specific knowledge, interest and motivation for the project.Involving patient representatives in the research process heightened the relevancy of the research and the quality of its contents. The SWG gave patient representatives and researchers a better mutual understanding. Overall, the conclusion is that the benefits obtained by involving patient representatives exceeds the additional costs this involves. ABSTRACT:
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.