ArticleSystematic reviews2019
Understanding patient engagement in health system decision-making: a co-designed scoping review.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.
- What makes patients engaged: a meta narrative review and multilevel perspective on patient engagement.BMC psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Promoting Patient Safety Through Patient Engagement at the Organisational Level: A Delphi-Based Needs Assessment Among Patient and Family Advisory Councils.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Trial
- Frameworks for Action: A Scoping Review of Organisational Patient Engagement Models in Healthcare.The International journal of health planning and management · 2026Article
- Review
- The Value and Challenges of Stakeholder Engagement in Rehabilitation Learning Health Systems: A Qualitative Pilot Study of Rehabilitation Directors.Learning health systems · 2026Article
- Screens and Teens: A youth participatory action research approach to developing a survey to assess sexual health risks in the digital age.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026Article
- Engaging patient and family advisory councils (PFACs) in patient safety in healthcare organisations: a rapid scoping review.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the methodology of independent Community Advisory Boards in health products research and development: a mixed-methods cross-sectional survey study.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Methods of Engaging Interest-Holders in Healthcare Evidence Syntheses: A Scoping Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
- Article
- The role of health literacy in boosting citizen engagement in appropriate use of antibiotics.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- Shared Decision-Making Tools Implemented in the Electronic Health Record: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Inter-societal Delphi Consensus on the topical nasal treatments in Italy.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2024Article
- Patient, caregiver and other knowledge user engagement in consensus-building healthcare initiatives: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Advancing Precision Medicine: A Review of Innovative In Silico Approaches for Drug Development, Clinical Pharmacology and Personalized Healthcare.Pharmaceutics · 2024Review
- Psychometric testing of the facilitative student-patient relationship scale within six EUROPEAN countries.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Research Buddy partnership in a MD-PhD program: lessons learned.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Review
- Direct Observation Methods: a Practical Guide for Health Researchers.PEC innovation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith healthcare striving to shift to a more person-centered delivery model, patient and family involvement must have a bigger role in shaping this. While many initiatives involving patients and family members focus on self-care, a broader understanding of patient participation is necessary. Ensuring a viable and sustainable critical number of qualified patients and family members to support this shift will be of utmost importance. The purpose of this study was to understand how health systems are intentionally investing in the training and skill development of patients and family members.
methodsPatient co-investigators and researchers conducted a scoping review of the existing literature on methods adopted by healthcare systems to build the skills and capacity of patients to participate in healthcare decision-making using a recognized methodological framework. Six electronic databases were searched to identify studies. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full-text papers for inclusion. The research team independently extracted data. Any disagreements were resolved by achieving consensus through discussion. Quantitative and qualitative content synthesis, as well as a quality assessment, was conducted.
resultsAfter eliminating duplicates, the search resulted in 9428 abstracts. Four hundred fifty-eight articles were reviewed and 15 articles were included. Four themes emerged: forums (33%), patient instructors (20%), workshops (33%), and co-design (13%). Four of the identified studies measured the impact and overall effectiveness of the respective programs. Examples of how patient and family members were supported (invested in) included advocacy training to support future involvement in engagement activities, a training program to conduct patient-led research, involvement in an immersive experience-based co-design initiative, and involvement in training pharmacy students. Overall, these studies found positive outcomes when patients and family members were recipients of these opportunities.
conclusionsThe results of this scoping review demonstrate that an evidence base around programs to advance patient engagement is largely absent. An opportunity exists for further research to identify strategies and measures to support patient engagement in healthcare decision-making.
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.